Skip to content

Add mention of GCP trials #2596

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

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Add mention of GCP trials #2596

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

demers-eric
Copy link
Contributor

@HeranGa0 @briancurtin @stj please review, and comment on the PR when trials are enabled in GCP MP. Thanks!

@demers-eric
Copy link
Contributor Author

@shainaraskas Sidenote, wondering if we should update this header given that both ECH and Serverless are available GCP MP.

applies_to:
  deployment:
    ess: ga
  serverless: unavailable
products:
  - id: cloud-hosted

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 15, 2025

🔍 Preview links for changed docs


Some differences exist when you subscribe to {{ecloud}} through the GCP Marketplace:

* There is no trial period. Billing starts when you subscribe to {{ecloud}}.
* Existing {{ecloud}} organizations cannot be converted to use the GCP Marketplace.
* New customers {{ecloud}} obtain a 7-day trial period. During this period, you can use a single deployment and three projects of {{ecloud}}. After this period, usage-based billing starts, unless you delete your cloud resources.
* Pricing for an {{ecloud}} subscription through the GCP Marketplace follows the pricing outlined on the [{{ecloud}}](https://console.cloud.google.com/marketplace/product/endpoints/elasticsearch-service.gcpmarketplace.elastic.co) page in the GCP Marketplace. Pricing is based the {{ecloud}} [Billing Dimensions](../../cloud-organization/billing/cloud-hosted-deployment-billing-dimensions.md).
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this billing dimensions link valid for the serverless case?

definitely open to changing the front matter. should just do a quick read of the page to make sure that it's all appropriate for serverless.

  • this item I mentioned
  • the snapshot/restore case - we don't offer this for serverless. could edit this with a hint that this is for ECH deployments only.
    image

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You're right that we should link to https://www.elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing/serverless-project-billing-dimensions too.
Ideally we'd have a single page to send user to when we want to talk about "EC billing dimensions". It would be helpful not just for GCP MP, but most references to cloud billing, including other MPs.

++ on mentioning that snapshot/restore is ECH only.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

we have this disambiguation section here that you could link to, but it also mentions specific serverless project dimensions: https://www.elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing#pricing-model

Copy link
Contributor Author

@demers-eric demers-eric Aug 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

++ good idea to use the subsection on that page!

I'm not sure how to add changes to another file to this PR, so I'll just describe it here:
I think that page would be even more effective if it was laid out this way, because of the ways eyes scan the page, and how hyperlinks stand out.

Each Elastic Cloud Serverless project type also has its own billing dimensions.

    [Elastic Cloud Hosted deployments billing dimensions](https://www.elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing/cloud-hosted-deployment-billing-dimensions)
    [Elastic Cloud Serverless billing dimensions](https://www.elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing/serverless-project-billing-dimensions)
        [Elasticsearch projects billing dimensions](https://www.elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing/elasticsearch-billing-dimensions)
        [Elastic Observability projects billing dimensions](https://www.elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing/elastic-observability-billing-dimensions)
        [Elastic Security projects](https://www.elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing/security-billing-dimensions)

Copy link
Collaborator

@shainaraskas shainaraskas Aug 18, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'll pop this into a followup issue: #2610

@shainaraskas
Copy link
Collaborator

@shainaraskas Sidenote, wondering if we should update this header given that both ECH and Serverless are available GCP MP.

applies_to:
  deployment:
    ess: ga
  serverless: unavailable
products:
  - id: cloud-hosted

sure. you could update it to:

applies_to:
  deployment:
    ess: ga
  serverless: ga
products:
  - id: cloud-hosted
  - id: cloud-serverless

Copy link
Member

@briancurtin briancurtin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we're going to handle https://github.com/elastic/docs-content/pull/2596/files#r2282791653 in a separate issue, then I think this is probably good to go. I made the suggested change to the header, so as far as I can tell this is approved.

@shainaraskas
Copy link
Collaborator

@briancurtin + @demers-eric the changes to elastic.co/docs/deploy-manage/cloud-organization/billing#pricing-model are going to be handled in a separate issue. the other suggestions in https://github.com/elastic/docs-content/pull/2596/files#r2279635052 still need to be addressed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants