Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

downgrade App Service plan #200

Closed
afeld opened this issue Nov 15, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #207
Closed

downgrade App Service plan #200

afeld opened this issue Nov 15, 2022 · 2 comments · Fixed by #207
Labels
infrastructure Terraform, Azure, etc.

Comments

@afeld
Copy link
Contributor

afeld commented Nov 15, 2022

We are currently using the PremiumV2 plan:

which is almost certainly more than we need, and thus a waste of money. More details.

This is the case in Benefits as well; asking DevSecOps about whether it's necessary.

@afeld afeld added the infrastructure Terraform, Azure, etc. label Nov 15, 2022
@angela-tran
Copy link
Member

angela-tran commented Nov 15, 2022

Maybe we should have dev and test environments use the Free or Shared plan and have prod use Basic

I think the Basic plan meets our needs

App Service on Linux is not supported on Shared pricing tier.

from https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/app-service/overview#limitations

Pricing table

@afeld
Copy link
Contributor Author

afeld commented Nov 15, 2022

From Param at DevSecOps, re: using PremiumV2 for Benefits:

We use Premium so that we get 20 instances to scale up in case needed, for all our Production environments. This also helps us create slots for lower environments in the same plan. Definitely you can go with the standard plan as we are going to have separate environments for Dev and Test. By the way standard plan gives us 10 instances which may be sufficient. Totally up to you.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
infrastructure Terraform, Azure, etc.
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants