[KCM-3698] Collections: Recommend against using idle 'share by cluster' #1180
Conversation
| Costs in the Kubernetes domain have a corresponding idle component. For any Kubernetes costs part of a collection, the idle cost can be optionally configured to be _included_ in the total cost displayed. This can be done from the Settings page under Idle in Collections. | ||
|
|
||
| The idle cost can be shared by cluster or by node. We do not recommend sharing idle by cluster as that may lead to cost inconsistencies when deduplicating the Kubernetes costs against the cloud costs for the same resource. By default, idle costs are hidden. |
|
@kwombach12 it looks like Bianca addressed your feedback here, but she won't be allowed to merge until you formally approve. It's a side-effect of using the "Request Changes" formalism. Can you drop a ✅ if everything looks good to you now? |
|
@nealormsbee - To my knowledge, these changes have to be manually applied on the IBM docs platform. This PR does, indeed, require an approval - although Kai has informally agreed to the proposed change already - but it should not need a merge. |
|
Correct, when everything here is approved I will have to (unfortunately) manually incorporate them in the new docs management tool (AEM). |
|
@chipzoller - You have manually applied some documentation changes on my behalf already. You've also pointed to a process that potential doc editors would have to go through to be able to apply changes themselves, although there are some complications. Do you advise me to go through that process and make the changes myself, or are you willing to ship these changes again? On one hand it would be valuable for me to have access to avoid depending on others when I have new docs to push - e.g. this other piece on Collections, docs on the Builder in the near future - but at the same time I would not contribute as an owner, I would still have to raise my pieces for review. What do you think? |
|
I do think it would be valuable to get you onboard to AEM so you can help write docs and so if you wanted to start that process it'd be valuable. However, I'm glad to get these in on your behalf in the near term and until I've had a chance to do some knowledge transfer with all those who want to participate. |
|
Thank you @chipzoller - then I will rely on you to transfer both the contents of this PR and of #1182 once they are approved. |
Related Issue
https://apptio.atlassian.net/browse/KCM-3698
Proposed Changes
Add a note in public docs warning against using idle 'share by cluster' due to risk of potential cost inconsistencies.
Content to be published via manual migration to IBM docs. This PR is only for review purposes.