Open
Conversation
danieldeleo
requested changes
Oct 4, 2024
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
closes #459
It can be more cost efficient to use either the on-demand or the reservation compute billing model depending on query patterns. This script aims to identify projects that obviously save cost by switching billing models and to provide template DDL to adjust accordingly.
The logic is essentially:
1.) on-demand -> reservations
Compare the on-demand cost to the worst case cost in reservations (all autoscaling). If autoscaling is less expensive, move to reservations.
2.) reservations -> on-demand
Compare the best case scenario for reservations (all baseline) to on-demand cost. If on-demand is less expensive, move to on-demand.