This message was deleted.

Hello! Could you please provide an example TF code so I can try to reproduce it? From your output snippet I see disk operations for the

curavm

resource, however

DATA[0]

is clipped, I assume it doesn't list the Disk operations cost.

Iam sorry about that . I didn't know . I didn't see that channel . do you want me to remove it?

Thank you for providing the example! No worries on removing the messages, all is good :) I tried to replicate this and indeed, the Storage operations cost component was not shown. You are correct, the disk operations don't apply for "Premium_LRS" (P20) disk type. We add this component only for "Standard_LRS" and "StandardSSD_LRS". Here are for your reference: 1. GH issue with details: https://github.com/infracost/infracost/issues/567 2. Code: https://github.com/infracost/infracost/blob/master/internal/providers/terraform/azure/managed_disk.go#L130

@busy-agent-35515, does this mean azure doesn't charge disk operations for premium managed disks ? or it's an infracost limitation

Good question. If I understand this page correctly https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/managed-disks/#pricing. the disk operations (like read/write) are not accounted for premium disks.

The total cost of Premium SSDs depends on the size and number of the disks, and will be affected by the number of outbound data transfers.

ok , but bear in mind that infracost doesn't know that when creating the usage file

Please elaborate. Infracost doesn't create the usage attribute for this resource

when say I run the below to generate the usage file

infracost breakdown --sync-usage-file --usage-file infracost-usage.yml --path /code

this is what I have in the usage yml :

# resource_usage:
  ##
  ## The following usage values apply to individual resources and override any value defined in the resource_type_default_usage section.
  ## All values are commented-out, you can uncomment resources and customize as needed.
  ##
  # azurerm_managed_disk.DATA[0]:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_managed_disk.DATA[1]:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_managed_disk.DATA[2]:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_managed_disk.DATA[3]:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_managed_disk.DATA[4]:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_managed_disk.RECO[0]:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_managed_disk.RECO[1]:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_linux_virtual_machine.curavm:
    # monthly_hrs: 0 # Monthly number of hours the instance ran for.
    # os_disk:
      # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.
  # azurerm_managed_disk.BIN:
    # monthly_disk_operations: 0 # Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.

Yeah, I see how this can be confusing. Currently, the only type of documentation for the usage values are the comments like

# Number of disk operations (writes, reads, deletes) using a unit size of 256KiB.

I think the easiest fix would be updating this comment to mention something like "Applies only for standard managed disks"

exactly , Although It's kinda minor enhancement and you guys are busy but maybe something to consider in future updates

We don't use the Azure Cloud ourselves, so we also rely on users and community to add the missing details, as they are experts with the providers they use.

totally agree

Thank you for the kind words infraheart Sorry for the confusion!

I knew I spoke to you already :D

Oh right! Sorry, I didn't recognize your username 😅