Settings and activity
12 results found
-
2 votes
AdminKinga Tegdesova (Admin, DoiT) shared this idea ·
-
1 vote
-
2 votes
-
2 votes
-
2 votes
-
4 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment -
4 votesGathering More Feedback · 0 comments · DoiT Cloud Intelligence » Cloud Analytics & Reports · Admin →
-
5 votes
-
5 votes
Need more information on how customers want to interact with the platform using Terraform.
An error occurred while saving the comment Hello Team,
One customer also addressed this need, where the use case would be to be able to automatically create attributions through terraform whenever a new customer is being added with a specific tag.
Basically auto create attributions with a new customer (pulling the relevant tagging into the scope, relevant AWS ID etc.), and set that new attribution up for cost anomaly detection right away.
Best,
-
4 votes
-
4 votes
-
2 votesUnder Development · 3 comments · DoiT Cloud Intelligence » Attributions & Attribution Groups · Admin →
An error occurred while saving the comment Hello Team,
The customer would like to be able to Filter/ Group by 'Service Item' level, which would provide higher granularity than the existing 'Service', grouping the specific Service costs into subcategories that make more sense to FinOps teams than Service or SKU levels.
On EC2 example, this would be sub categories such as:
EC2 Compute, EC2 Transfer, EC2 NAT Gateway Usage etc.This granularity would be something that shows the cost specificities linked to a certain Service.
Setting up these 'Service Items' would be extremely manual in Cloud Navigator within Attributions, hence it makes more convenient for the customer to stay with CloudHealth data and interface. Having this mid level granularity would be a game changer for the customer, allowing them to move towards Navigator more.
Thank you for looking into this
Kind Regards,
Hello Team,
The customer tend to find some of the error messages unclear when facing product limitations.
Whenever the customer runs a heavy analytical report with complexity on Attribution Groups for example, the following error message shows:
'' we could not build your report due to a problem with our infrastructure. Our technical staff have been notified and will be looking into this with the upmost urgency''
This occurs when the customer is running heavy reports with great complexity and it does not seem to be caused by temporary technical issue.
The customer would like to see a more accurate error message, which would provide relevant information/next step on 'the need of adjusting report complexity' to achieve some results.
The current error message leaves the customer without guidance evoking the sensation that this issue will be fixed in a short time by the technical team.
Kind Regards,