Use a more user-friendly identifier for Cloud Costs Breakdown on Overview

[keithhand]

What problem are you trying to solve?
When viewing the Cloud Costs Breakdown - Account section in the new UI, the line items are based on an ID, sometimes making it hard to determine which account is which.

Describe the solution you'd like
Changing the item information displayed to be something more user-friendly. I'm not sure if there is a better value to reference for AWS, but both GCP and Azure have easier-to-read names (project id and subscription name, respectively).

Describe alternatives you've considered
Reference the accounts based on the ID displayed in the cloud console.

How would users interact with this feature?
Viewing the Overview page

Before:

After:

┆Issue is synchronized with this Jira Task by Unito

[geborgeson]

👍

[teevans]

This would be nice - @nealormsbee - Do we have this data available to map through?

[nealormsbee]

I don't think we have data to map account numbers directly to some other, friendlier alias. Using GCP as an example, there's not a 1-1 mapping between Account and Project (at least the way we model them). Here's a table aggregated by provider/account/project, taken from multi.test:

You'll see the same account number holds multiple projects.

What we can do is aggregate this table by Project, or by Account/Project, to help make these rows friendlier.

[nealormsbee]

Marking this as linked to https://github.com/kubecost/cost-analyzer-frontend/issues/1474 so that we can close both issues together.

[kwombach12]

I think this would be a signification improvement to our user experience. Will add it to our v1.101 proposals

[MikeFindsThings]

Has there been any movement on this?

[kwombach12]

@MikeFindsThings Not yet. I will see if this is something we can squeeze in 106

[MikeFindsThings]

@kwombach12 how's this looking for 106? Had a user ask about it today.

[kwombach12]

@MikeFindsThings I should have a better idea as to whether we have capacity for this in 106 next week!

[MikeFindsThings]

@kwombach12 , bump 🙃

[kwombach12]

@MikeFindsThings Unfortunately, it seems we dont have capacity for this in 106 as it is a larger feature request and our focus for 106 is on polish/bugs