- Newest
- Most votes
- Most comments
Your logic is right in terms of SP application (SP will apply to resources that get highest % discount first, and any remaining SP $ will partially apply to any remaining running resources). The math looks somewhat right, too :) Though, I'd calculate it a bit differently... I still get the similar result with your example. The point is that purchasing SP should reduce your overall bill.
I'll just write it up once again, with slightly modified numbers. Taking your scenario as example. Let's say, you spend $14 per hour on-demand. Let's say, Resource A takes $6 of this hourly spend, and Resource B takes the remaining $8 (on-demand). Resource A could get 33% discount from Savings Plan, and Resource B only 25% discount.
If you wanted to make Savings Plan commitment to cover 100% of your running on-demand usage, then you would have to commit to $10.02 worth of hourly SP commitment (67% from $6 + 75% from $8). This way, instead of paying $14 on-demand, you would EFFECTIVELY pay only $10.02 for the Savings Plan.
Now, let's say you want to make a Savings Plans hourly commitment for $7:
- Every hour, the SP will fully cover Resource A (if running continuously), which would consume $4.02 of the SP hourly commitment
- Then, the remaining $2.98 of SP commitment, will apply to Resource B, and based of its 25% discount, it will cover approx. $3.973 of its on-demand usage.
- As a result, you will end up paying remaining $4.027 of on-demand for the Resource B, which will be $11.027 in total for both resources, compared with the original $14
This seems to roughly align with the numbers you provided. Except in my example I assume that Resource A gets 33% discount, and in your example you use 33.3% discount. Other than that, it gets close to total $11 hourly spend, compared to the original $14
Relevant content
- asked 7 months ago
- asked 9 days ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 2 years ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 2 years ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated a year ago
- AWS OFFICIALUpdated 2 years ago
Could you rephrase your questions.
Long story short (long story in my answer... short story here in the comment...) - your SP application logic is correct, and your math seems to add up as well :)