added NFS costs #247
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ Number of CU per Hour | |||||
| </tr> | ||||||
| </table> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| **For Standard Storage** | ||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
| <table> | ||||||
|
|
@@ -304,7 +304,79 @@ Number of CU per Hour | |||||
| </tr> | ||||||
| </table> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| ### Additional Costs | ||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. What does it mean? Can we write clearly what the additional costs refer to already in the headline?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. I second that. Also, this introduces the "Additional Costs" as something different from the "Underlying Metrics"; as it's another headline on the same level. But aren't the "premium costs" still a kind of underlying metric? Just a special one, for a limited group of users (who probably can opt in to use that service and incur the cost).
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Probably wrong wording here. We must highlight that there are, potentially, other costs. These costs could be introduced by consuming features from cloud manager (for example redis). SOmething more in the future?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. In our docs, we only describe the current state. No hinting at future plans etc. When the future items are implemented, then we document them. No need to reserve space for something that doesn't exist yet. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| Certain features of Cloud Manager may initiate additional hardware resources in the cloud provider account. These features could potentially incur extra costs based on the resources you implement. | ||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. "Certain features" sounds vague. Do we know which features? Can we be more specific here? May they initiate additional hardware resources? or is that certain?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. What is Cloud Manager? We can't assume that readers of this document have any idea about this specific module, or in fact about Kyma modules in general. We should start with a sentence that these "Additional Costs" are specific to users of the Cloud Manager module (if I don't misunderstand the situation). These aren't generic "additional costs", they have a clearly defined scope and target group. I concur with Gosia that the whole paragraph is extremely vague. |
||||||
| All additional costs are calculated using a baseline formula, which is a combination of the two metrics used to compute other Kyma costs: **CPU** and **Storage**. | ||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Do you mean the formula from the Backward Calculation section?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. This paragraph talks about CPU and storage, but the table below only mentions (premium) storage and never again talks about CPU. So what is there to say about CPU in the context of "additional cost"?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. No, in general, to derive the costs introduced for the cloud manager "premium" storage and Redis, we combine the storage metric and/or the node calculation metric in a formula. For example, at the moment, 64 GB premium storage = 3* 64 GB standard storage. For Redis, it's not a linear formula: you have to match the GB in a table. When we will introduce the worker pools and additional machine types it will be 1 node = xgeneric purpose node and/ystorage |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| #### Premium Storage | ||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Why is it called premium? What does it mean?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. As above, I'm open to any other definition. the short answer is: because it's the terminology used in the price estimator. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| Premium storage can be enabled using Cloud Manager and will create storage using NFS technology. | ||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. When someone adds the Cloud Manager Module do they already start using the premium storage? What are the prerequisites?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. I concur, it's unclear if this is automatic or manual, and whether it is avoidable for Cloud Manager users. Could this sentence be rephrased to: Also, what is "NFS"? It seems to be important (otherwise you could just drop the last three words), but it's explained nowhere. Is normal storage created with some other technology? If yes, why does the difference matter?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. right. should we include the definition as here --> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_File_System ? We must provide another definition, like: this is not automatic, but the cloud manager module is a requirement to start creating and consuming it |
||||||
| The pricing for premium storage is based on the storage metrics and is scaled up by a factor of **3** compared to standard storage. | ||||||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. In line 310 you wrote that the additional costs are calculated using the basic formula. So actually is the formula the same as for the standard storage or not?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. premium it's 3*standard storage formula. so it's the formula of the standard storage but scaled by a factor 3. How can we write it? |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| <table> | ||||||
| <tr> | ||||||
| <th valign="top"> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Amount of Storage | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| </th> | ||||||
| <th valign="top"> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| Number of CU per Hour | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| </th> | ||||||
| </tr> | ||||||
| <tr> | ||||||
| <td valign="top"> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| 1GB | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| </td> | ||||||
| <td valign="top"> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| 0.00169271 ( = 3 * 0.00056423611) | ||||||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. here, you use multiplication mark
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. good point. we should use the same in the entire document |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| </td> | ||||||
| </tr> | ||||||
| <tr> | ||||||
| <td valign="top"> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| 32GB | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| </td> | ||||||
| <td valign="top"> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| 0.05416667 \(0.00169271 x 32\) | ||||||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. here, you use multiplication mark
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. i suppose this is correct, the error is above |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| </td> | ||||||
| </tr> | ||||||
| </table> | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| #### Cloud-Managed Redis | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| When deployed with the Cloud Manager module, Redis creates a cluster in the Kyma's cloud provider account and begins consuming new, dedicated machines. | ||||||
|
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. need to be changed to something like When Redis is deployed with the Cloud Manager module, it creates a Redis cluster in the Kyma's cloud provider account and begins consuming new, dedicated machines.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggested change
|
||||||
| Generally, a cache is defined by its size, measured in GiB, which is then used to determine metering and billing using storage metrics as the basis. | ||||||
| Because the price is standardized across all available cloud providers, Redis is offered in several different tiers that are essentially equivalent across all cloud providers. This applies to both, the basic and the premium plans. | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| | **Tier** | **Approx. Available Size (GiB)** | **Cost expressed in Storage size** | **Cost in CU** | | ||||||
| |:--------: |:--------------------------------: |-----------------------------------: |---------------: | | ||||||
| | S1 | 1 | 182 | 74 | | ||||||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Which units belong to these naked numbers?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. that's exactly what in the header, no euro. it's "the equivalent storage space you are consuming". SO having 1 gb of redis cache in terms of storage (and storage costs) is like having 182 gb storage |
||||||
| | S2 | 3 | 364 | 148 | | ||||||
| | S3 | 6 | 953 | 387 | | ||||||
| | S4 | 12 | 1915 | 778 | | ||||||
| | S5 | 24 | 3793 | 1541 | | ||||||
| | S6 | 48 | 7591 | 3084 | | ||||||
| | S7 | 101 | 15180 | 6167 | | ||||||
| | S8 | 202 | 30353 | 12331 | | ||||||
| | P1 | 5 | 1903 | 773 | | ||||||
| | P2 | 12 | 3828 | 1555 | | ||||||
| | P3 | 24 | 7586 | 3082 | | ||||||
| | P4 | 48 | 15180 | 6167 | | ||||||
| | P5 | 101 | 30363 | 12335 | | ||||||
| | P6 | 200 | 60704 | 24661 | | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| NB: **Approx. Available Size (GiB)** might vary depending on the cloud provider. | ||||||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. If this means nota bene: We never use latin abbreviations in documentation. |
||||||
|
|
||||||
| ### Examples | ||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
@@ -335,9 +407,9 @@ Find the Kyma price calculator on [https://kyma-project.github.io/price-calculat | |||||
|
|
||||||
| 2. Choose the **minimum of VMs** you need. | ||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Why are we dropping the steps to estimate the hours per month and the optional addition of more nodes? Did the functionality and UI of the Kyma cost calculator change? Are the new two steps replacements for the old steps?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. it's misleading. You cannot pause or hibernate a cluster or storage. It was also removed from the price estimator. because it was completely misleading. |
||||||
| 3. Optionally, add more storage and additional capabilities to the calculation. | ||||||
|
|
||||||
| 4. To estimate the eventual discount applicable with your contract, you can also change the **Conversion rate from Capacity Units to €**. | ||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
| Note that the result is an estimate, and the monthly bill may vary depending on the actual hours and size of the Kyma cluster \(workload and storage\) that was running in a month. | ||||||
|
|
||||||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The word "Standard" here can be misleading... We already use the word to describe the Service Plan. Maybe "Basic" instead? or leave this just as it was and add "Premium" as a differentiation?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In general, isn't it still the same "kind" of storage - just priced differently? It's not that for premium, the hardware is gold-plated? :D
So basically, what concretely is it that makes premium storage "premium" and doesn't allow putting it into the same category (just with 3x higher price) as the existing "For Storage" (vs "For CPU")
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it's exactly the reason why it's more expensive. It's a more performant storage, it should offer a better I/O, but also support additional capabilities not covered by the standard storage like read write from more then one pod.
So yes both are storages but one is more expensive because it's a different architecture for storage and provide additional features.
it's like HANA and sqlite... both are databases, yes, but can we consider HANA as a premium db and SQLite as a basic database?