Azure Services Mapping

any news on this ?  thank you

@Stacie Taylor @Kyle Castro

We had an error in the process of the October Azure mapping files.  This has been corrected and we are about ready to publish the v2.18 Azure mapping file which has ~8,400 rows again.  We apologize for the inconvenience and have put in steps to avoid a future issue.  

Thanks,

Ed

Hi @Apptio UserAssistance team, I second @Stacie Taylor's comment.

Why did the number of rows drop significantly from v2.16 to v2.17?

Are the rows in v2.17 supposed to be appended to v2.16?

I don't understand why the Azure mapping for 2.16 is over 8K lines and the 2.17 only over 4K.  Is there an issue with the 2.17 version?

Hello All

I am trying to find the Service Mapping for:

Azure Active Directory B2C - Basic Stored Users
API Management - Basic - Unit
API Management - Developer - Unit
Azure Bot Service - Free - Premium Channel Messages
Azure Redis Cache Standard - C0 - Cache Instance 
Azure Test Plans - Users
BizTalk Server Standard - 1-4 vCPU VM License
Cloud Services Av2 Series - A2 v2
Container Registry - Standard - Registry Units
Custom Vision - S0 - Images Storage
Event Grid - Operations
SignalR - Units - Free

Thanks in Advance, 

Dhivya

Thank you that helps. From your list of column headers, it appears you had an odd file with different header casing (example: Subtower vs SubTower). The header casing we have in our published Azure file is correct (example: SubTower). It is not clear how your file ended up with a different header casing but the fix to for this is to update the headers on your side to match the the header casing as found in the latest Azure Service Mapping files. Sorry to see that you have this issue. Let me know if you need more details on how to update.

there are Costumers,e.g. like we, which had implemented the Apptio with Release 11.xxx  and all formulas are key sensitiv at this time (?).

Release 11.xxx   the headers was as follow:

Service,ServiceType,ServiceResource,Unit,Type,Instance Type,Tower,Subtower,Tower 2.0,SubTower 2.0,Service Type 2.0,Service Category 2.0,Service Name 2.0

in your newest files:

Service,ServiceType,ServiceResource,Unit,Type,Instance Type,Tower,SubTower,Tower 2.0,Subtower 2.0,Service Type 2.0,Service Category 2.0,Service Name 2.0

I marked it BOLD perhaps you can see also a difference   ;-)

Task closed because I dont see any progress and we pointed this out several times

Hi, I was able to track down the last 4 versions of the Azure Service Mappings files that were published here.

The upper/lower casing for each of the headers from the 4 versions are exactly the same & all have 13 columns.

Can you clarify "The problem is the case sensitivity of the header"?

The problem is the case sensitivity of the header in reference to the existing formulas (as implements with older files) and the "new" products on MS Azure side (or with other word the changing of services om MS side). best Regards

Hi, we are currently updating Azure Service Mappings and should be published here before the end of November.

Thank you --Ono

Hi, I would like to assist on this - can you help clarify "very different" for v2.11? I've compared to v2.10 and the column headers match exactly (note: apostrophes around each entry will not impact how the file is consumed and can be ignored). These are the column names I found:

1: Service
2: ServiceType
3: ServiceResource
4: Unit
5: Type
6: Instance Type
7: Tower
8: SubTower
9: Tower 2.0
10: Subtower 2.0
11: Service Type 2.0
12: Service Category 2.0
13: Service Name 2.0

Thank you --Ono

Any update on top on V2.11 available?

V2.11 looks very differnt to previous versions  => e.g. Spelling in Header and all entrys marked with apostrophe......anyone already used the new fileso far? best regards Siggi

@Randall Tennant,

As TBMAs are we responsible for maintaining this table in the Cloud Cost Mgmt app?

I also notice that our mapping for Azure completely broke in Aug 2018.  At the same time we had Datalink issue with CCM causing us to have to manually reload data starting with that month.  Since then all the Meter columns needed for Service Mapping have completely changed values.  Since then, we have fixed out Datalink feed but the columns/data still does not sync at all with this table.

I'm trying to determine if this is something we did or if you're aware if Azure changed billing.

Thanks,

Jeffrey

Agreed. Can we get this in columns rather than a dump of all data in the first column?

I do not see a way to roll back to 2.9. Can you please repost 2.9?

All - 2.9.1 was introduced on January 10th and has some incorrect column headers.  Please do not use 2.9.1.  We are working to address the issue and will take the following actions:

1. Remove 2.9.1 from this posting and roll back to 2.9 (short term)
2. Update the latest mapping file to include the correct column headers - we will publish a version 2.9.2 to correct the issue.

I also noticed that the column headers changed, so we decided to reconfigure our table transforms to accommodate the new headers in v2.9.1.

If this is gonna be the new format, please advise. we've already made several changes just to get the towers, subtowers, and service categories looked up in this file...

Randy,

Is there any reason why the format of the file has changed? As file is now single column for all headings and values.

Also you have changed the naming convention for this update.

Can you please republish is normal format & using ATUM v1 & v2 naming conventions.

Thanks,

John Feore

Will updates for ATUM v3 be published soon?

File 2.8 shows the Error’s in the header  again e.g.:  SubTower  vs  Subtower  => or should we change our own Platform

Last week Azure introduced a large number of service name changes that affect how values for Meter Category, Meter Sub-category, and Meter Name appear in the EA detailed bill.  Because the Apptio Azure service mapping relies on these names to derive ATUM attributes (such as Tower, Subtower, and the TBM Services Hierarchy), those changes introduced a large number of gaps in the mappings.  We are currently working to fill those gaps and expect to be completed by the end of October 23rd.  Once completed, we will post a new Azure Services Mapping file here in Community.

Thanks for noting the issues with the Azure services mapping file - we are currently working on removing duplicates and will post a new version by the end of this week (2018-10-12).

File V2.7 is incorrect.....we had the same issues here as well with the same issues as Amanda. We changed it manually so far.............

And more Error’s in the header   e.g.:  SubTower  vs  Subtower  

Our team is getting a various in our Cloud Service Provider Master for Tower and Subtower due multiple mappings for the Locally Redundant - Standard IO - Block Blob (GB) services/service types.

Thanks for the comment, Kyle.  We are currently working on an update to the Azure services mapping and are looking to publish it to Community next week.  Additionally, to your point of providing an automated update process, we are working on that as well - we will look to include that in our November release and will have more details over the next couple of months.

Is this thread still alive?

We find that the Azure Services mapping document is already a bit outdated.

Might there be a way for us to update R12's built-in Azure Table through DataLink somehow?

I think that would be great!

Thank you for the v2.4 update!

I found a few more that are not in the list:

Lookup:

API Management - API Management - Developer
API Management - API Management - Premium
Azure Data Factory - v2 - Data Movement Cloud IR
Azure Data Factory - v2 - Orchestration Cloud IR
Logic Apps - Logic Apps - Connector
Logic Apps - Logic Apps - Data Retention
Machine Learning - Experimentation - Free Seat
Machine Learning - Model Management - Free Tier
Network Watcher - Network Watcher - Network Logs Ingested
Storage - Geo Redundant - Standard IO - Page Blob Write Addtl IO Units
Storage - Geo Redundant - Standard IO - Queue Class 1 Operation Units
Storage - Storage - GPv2 Std IO - Queue Class 2 Operation Units
Storage - Storage - Standard IO - Page Blob Read Addtl IO Units
Storage - Storage - Standard IO - Page Blob Write Addtl IO Units
Storage - Storage - Standard IO - Queue Class 1 Operation Units
Virtual Machines - SQL Server Linux Enterprise (up to 4c) - Compute Hours
Visual Studio - Professional

Regards,

Robert

Hello Siegfried - the updated Azure mapping file now includes rows for Logic Apps including those you call out above.  Please let us know via cloudmapping@apptio.com if you find other gaps in your Azure bills.  To make diagnosis faster and easier, please include the following data for those bill line items:

From the Cloud Service Provider object:

• Provider
• Product
• Item
• Procedure

Or, from the Azure bill directly

• Meter Category
• Meter Subcategory
• Meter Name

Thank You!

Thx for update, but we detected today that the entry for "Logic Apps Connector " & "Logic Apps Data Retention" (within the Dec 2017 billing data) is missing. 

Thx for the update, but the year should surely be 2017...

I don't see it listed at the top of this thread.

How can I get my hands on it?

Hi Matt... yes, the new Azure mapping file (v2.0) includes columns for ATUM 2.0 IT Resource Tower and Services.

Is there a mapping reflective of ATUM v2?

@Guillermo Cuadrado, good stuff and thank you for sharing!  I'm hopeful we'll have more information after February.  We have a Cloud Hackathon and Symposium going on next month, so I'm staying out of their hair.   I have met w/one of the guys over there, though, explained TBM, and he was excited - he immediately saw the benefit of being able to cost the private cloud and said we "should be able" to cost by application within each tenant space, so we'll see.  Right now the test environment is changing too much for us to start in on anything - mainly because they're all getting ready for the events just around the corner.  I'm hoping to circle back w/them toward the end of February or early March.  Will definitely keep you updated and may ping you w/any specific questions that pop up.  Thanks again!!

We have implemented private IaaS based on OpenStack as an application for now. It is not ideal but it works - to an extent. I have had to create dummy virtual machines linked to the ESX hosts that make the private cloud fabric. Thus I can map storage and also get network and data center costs.

Something we still need to figure out how to map the costs to the tenants' projects: we defined an algorithm based on the projects' quota to allocate costs to the related business services. More work needs to be done, for I know that our cloud infrastructure people will want to see the costs on a per-project basis.

We are considering implementing a separate object between servers and applications that would allow us to do this better.

I hope this helps - feel free to reach out! @Jenny Franklin

Hi Mike, you mentioned "but can we create a mapping for OpenStack's Ceilometer, usage tracking tool."  Have you done that on your end?  Was looking for something similar...  Thx!

Hi Mike, did you finish your mapping for OpenStack?

We are currently working on an update - it should be available within a week or so.  Thanks!

When will this be updated again?

Hi Mike... great to hear that the Azure services mapping file is helpful.  We do have a similar mapping file for AWS.  You can also find the latest version of that on TBMConnect here: AWS Services Mapping .

The AWS mapping file is conceptually similar to Azure, but because of the very different approach to defining services and the less structured service metadata included in the bill, the AWS Service Mapping file is much longer and may include more gaps depending on the services you are using.  Happy to jump on a call to walk through the approach if that would be helpful.  We are continually working with AWS as they improve their service catalog and billing-related capabilities and will post any updates or changes on community.

As for the other public IaaS providers, Google is on our roadmap and we're keeping an eye on Rackspace.  In terms of private cloud providers, given the services offered through those platforms are purely custom (as far as I know), we would likely take a customer by customer approach to mapping those services to ATUM.  We are looking to include all of the above in our Datalink product that enables ingestion automation.  I would be interested to hear what you're top priorities are and getting any direct feedback - feel free to reach out directly to rtennant@apptio.com.

Thanks,

Randy Tennant

I was thinking more about this.  Perhaps we can work together to create an OpenStack Service Mapping document.  I intend to make one anyway and I can contribute to the community.

Randall, This is great!.  I intend to use this in my next implementation of Apptio at Walmart in a few months.  Can I assume that there is a similar document for Amazon, Google, and Rackspace?     Also, I was wondering if you could point me in the right direction on a similar topic.    I work at Walmart's eCommerce group and we are creating many of these same types of services internally on our private clouds, both OpenStack and VMware.   Do you have mappings for these?  A lot of if is custom work, especially on Openstack,  but can we create a mapping for OpenStack's Ceilometer, usage tracking tool.