[Dylan16807]

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. In so many use cases, shutting off everything except storage would do a good job. And the cloud provider doesn't have to decide anything. It's a simple matter of setting a spending limit with specified semantics. A magic "do what I want" spending limit is not necessary.

[manigandham]

> "shutting off everything except storage would do a good job"

Except it wouldn't. This is the 3rd time in this thread explaining that. Edge cases matter, especially when creating leading to new mistakes like setting a budget and deleting data or shutting off service when customers need it most.

If it's not a hard budget but a complex set of rules to disable services... then you already have that today. Use the alarms and APIs to turn off what you don't need.

[Dylan16807]

Edge cases are the difference between good job and perfect job. It makes no sense to use edge cases to say it qualifies as neither.

> If it's not a hard budget but a complex set of rules to disable services... then you already have that today. Use the alarms and APIs to turn off what you don't need.

I have been describing a simple set of rules, not a complex one.

It used to be extremely difficult to get accurate usage data on all their services. Has that been fixed? If not, then the alarms aren't good enough. If the alarms can automate enough right now, in a non-buggy way, then that should be the answer to people "hey, the alarms do more than alarm, use them to trigger shutdowns". Don't say "it can't be done, sorry". If the alarms aren't good enough for that automation, then the argument stands.

And using the APIs means that each company that wants safety is duplicating effort in an almost untested way, a recipe for so many bugs it makes the problem worse. No, this needs to be a feature of AWS itself.