You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
fix(azure): flag historical purchase amounts recorded in lookback-window units #669
History API: expose the flag on history rows (handler_history.go ~1121).
Dashboard: exclude flagged rows from YTD savings totals, or include them with an annotation (handler_dashboard.go ~713).
Frontend: a "pre-fix estimate" badge on flagged rows.
Backend (1-3) and frontend (4) as separate PRs to stay under the 400-line limit.
Open owner questions (blocking)
Cutover timestamp: when migration 106 was applied in prod. Rows before it are flagged. Also needs rollout evidence that 106 was applied in dev and prod and a recollection ran.
Exclude vs annotate: should flagged rows be left out of YTD savings totals, or counted and annotated?
Scope additions from PR #671 review: (1) existing GCP purchase_history rows keep the term total as upfront_cost (the pin before a32fd1a recorded CommitmentCost; GCP CUDs have no upfront), so analytics and coverage double-count them; same stale-row class, same flag could cover provider=gcp rows before the pin bump. (2) The execution-level history row uses exec.TotalUpfrontCost (handler_history.go:515, term total from the recommendation) while new per-purchase GCP rows record 0, so the two disagree. Related: #683
Released: the issue lists blocking owner questions (the prod cutover timestamp for migration 106 and rollout evidence, among others), which I can't answer from here. Happy to do the backend half (flag migration, history API field, dashboard exclusion) once the cutover is known. @cristim
Activity
cristim commentedon Oct 8, 2026
Scope additions from PR #671 review: (1) existing GCP
purchase_historyrows keep the term total asupfront_cost(the pin before a32fd1a recordedCommitmentCost; GCP CUDs have no upfront), so analytics and coverage double-count them; same stale-row class, same flag could cover provider=gcp rows before the pin bump. (2) The execution-level history row usesexec.TotalUpfrontCost(handler_history.go:515, term total from the recommendation) while new per-purchase GCP rows record 0, so the two disagree. Related: #683IAmJSD commentedon Oct 20, 2026
Claiming: working on this
IAmJSD commentedon Oct 20, 2026
Released: the issue lists blocking owner questions (the prod cutover timestamp for migration 106 and rollout evidence, among others), which I can't answer from here. Happy to do the backend half (flag migration, history API field, dashboard exclusion) once the cutover is known. @cristim