Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.

Bug 1364404

Summary: [platformmanagement_public_713] No quota listed in a project even if the project label matches selector for the cluster resource quota
Product: OpenShift Container Platform Reporter: Qixuan Wang <>
Component: Command Line InterfaceAssignee: David Eads <deads>
Status: NEW --- QA Contact: Xingxing Xia <xxia>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: unspecifiedCC: aos-bugs, deads, ffranz, jforrest, jokerman, mmccomas
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Qixuan Wang 2016-08-05 09:47:27 UTC
Description of problem:
Create labeled projects and a cluster quota, we can see the cluster quota statistics under a project whose label matches label selector in web console, but we can't get these statistics by command "oc describe project xxx".

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
openshift v1.3.0-alpha.2+89b7193
kubernetes v1.3.0+507d3a7
etcd 2.3.0+git

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create 4 projects (project-a, project-b, project-c, project-d)
# oc new-project $project

2. Label projects
# oc label namespace project-a user=dev --config=./admin.kubeconfig 
# oc label namespace project-b user=dev --config=./admin.kubeconfig 
# oc label namespace project-c user=qe --config=./admin.kubeconfig 
# oc label namespace project-d user=qe --config=./admin.kubeconfig 

3. Create a clusterquota with label selector "user=dev"
# oc create clusterresourcequota crq --project-label-selector=user=dev --hard=pods=10 --hard=services=15 --hard secrets=20 --config=./admin.kubeconfig 

4. Check clusterquota
# oc describe clusterresourcequota crq --config=./admin.kubeconfig

5. Check quota in these projects 
# oc describe project $project

Actual results:
4. [root@dhcp-141-95 test]# oc describe clusterresourcequota crq --config=./admin.kubeconfig
Name:		crq
Namespace:	<none>
Created:	21 seconds ago
Labels:		<none>
Annotations:	<none>
Label Selector: user=dev
AnnotationSelector: map[]
Resource	Used	Hard
--------	----	----
pods		 0	10
secrets		18	20
services	0	15

5. [root@dhcp-141-95 qwang]# oc describe project project-a
Name:			project-a
Namespace:		<none>
Created:		9 minutes ago
Labels:			user=dev
Display Name:		<none>
Description:		<none>
Status:			Active
Node Selector:		<none>
Quota:			<none>
Resource limits:	<none>

Expected results:
5. In web console we can get "Cluster Quota" "Limits resource usage across a set of projects" via click Resources->Quota under project-a/project-b, so should cluster quota also be listed when we describe a project?

Additional info:

Comment 1 David Eads 2016-08-05 13:03:13 UTC
@ffranz  How many resources do you want to try to summarize underneath a project describer?  Each one has a cost both in terms of API access (command latency) and screen real estate.  Seems like quota doesn't really matter to people unless they're close to the limit.

Comment 2 Fabiano Franz 2016-08-05 20:09:03 UTC
I'm not opposed to have some cluster quota information (unless it's too costly of course) specifically in describe. This is a command specifically meant for screen reading, so it's acceptable if it is composed by multiple API calls and expected that it have things well formatted visually. Pretty much like in a web page. 

BTW it looks like the project describer is very raw overall. It could make good use of having some information added and visual improvements.

But I also don't think this is not high priority, I'm making this 'low'.