{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/issues/424","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/issues/424/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/issues/424/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/issues/424/events","html_url":"https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-metering/pull/424","id":368413376,"node_id":"MDExOlB1bGxSZXF1ZXN0MjIxNTk3ODQz","number":424,"title":"Documentation: add initial roll-up report","user":{"login":"tschuy","id":6532435,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjY1MzI0MzU=","avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/6532435?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy","html_url":"https://github.com/tschuy","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"id":1063810420,"node_id":"MDU6TGFiZWwxMDYzODEwNDIw","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/labels/size/L","name":"size/L","color":"ededed","default":false},{"id":1079851228,"node_id":"MDU6TGFiZWwxMDc5ODUxMjI4","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/labels/skip-all","name":"skip-all","color":"fbca04","default":false}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":2,"created_at":"2018-10-09T21:52:48Z","updated_at":"2018-10-09T22:14:50Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"CONTRIBUTOR","pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/pulls/424","html_url":"https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-metering/pull/424","diff_url":"https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-metering/pull/424.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-metering/pull/424.patch"},"body":"The reports generated with the examples in the docs produce the same output.\r\n\r\nI'd like to rendez-vous with you about why we're doing both `<=` and `>=` in general in ReportGenerationQueries by default. I think that's probably a mistake in general, and will lead to things getting miscounted no matter what. After all, even without automated roll-up, there's at least someone somewhere who deals with these reports in chunks, and as it stands we're double-counting every start/end point.\r\n\r\nAlso, thoughts on what to do about the `data_start`/`data_end` on the aggregated reports? It seems to me that we either have to accept internal gaps that we can't expose on larger scales (how do we propagate the fact that on the 3rd we were missing twenty minutes of data?), fail out, or add a data_period that isn't just a pair of dates."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/issues/comments/428371761","html_url":"https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-metering/pull/424#issuecomment-428371761","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/operator-framework/operator-metering/issues/424","id":428371761,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQyODM3MTc2MQ==","user":{"login":"tschuy","id":6532435,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjY1MzI0MzU=","avatar_url":"https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/6532435?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy","html_url":"https://github.com/tschuy","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/tschuy/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-10-09T22:14:50Z","updated_at":"2018-10-09T22:14:50Z","author_association":"CONTRIBUTOR","body":"Also, I'd like to make an easier way to do this. We can of course always support doing it the manual way like this, but maybe adding the ability to automatically create and aggregate a smaller report when creating a larger report:\r\n\r\n```\r\napiVersion: metering.openshift.io/v1alpha1\r\nkind: ScheduledReport\r\nmetadata:\r\n  name: namespace-cpu-usage-per-month\r\nspec:\r\n  generationQuery: \"namespace-cpu-usage\"\r\n  reportingStart: '2018-10-09T00:00:00Z'\r\n  schedule:\r\n    period: \"monthly\"\r\n    monthly:\r\n      aggregateFrom: \"daily\"\r\n```\r\n\r\nMy first thought is immediately that we'd run into issues with divisibility -- months can't be broken into weeks. The following would be feasible:\r\n* monthly -> daily, hourly\r\n* weekly -> daily, hourly\r\n* daily -> hourly"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"tschuy"}}