I have a question regarding the difference in SLA credit percentages between Compute Engine (including Load Balancing) and Bare Metal Solution.
According to the SLA documentation:
Since both services run critical workloads, I would like to understand why there is such a significant difference in the SLA credit percentages.
Is it due to differences in infrastructure responsibility, network dependencies, or other factors? Could you clarify the reasoning behind this distinction?
Hi @sumin1,
Welcome to Google Cloud Community!
Google Cloud's Service Level Agreements (SLAs) for Compute Engine, Load Balancing, and Bare Metal Solution services define the maximum financial credits available to customers in the event of service unavailability. These credits vary based on the service and the extent of the downtime experienced.
The following are the Service Level Agreements for the following Google Cloud Platform services.
Compute Engine and Load Balancing:
In summary, the difference in maximum SLA credits reflects the varying levels of control and responsibility between Google and the customer. Fully managed services like Compute Engine and Load Balancing offer higher SLA credits since Google handles end-to-end management, allowing for greater compensation in case of failures. In contrast, Bare Metal Solution involves shared responsibilities, where both Google and the customer contribute to the service’s performance, resulting in a lower maximum credit that accounts for this partnership.
Note: Always refer to the official and most up-to-date Google Cloud SLAs for the precise terms and conditions. You can find these on the Google Cloud website in the legal section. Search for "Google Cloud Platform Service Level Agreements"
If you have any more concerns or questions, you may reach out to Google Cloud Support for further assistance.
Was this helpful? If so, please accept this answer as “Solution”. If you need additional assistance, reply here within 2 business days and I’ll be happy to help.
By the way, I noticed that third parties like AWS seem to offer credits covering up to 100% of the customer's maximum payment, even for bare metal solutions/instances. On the other hand, Google seems to take a more conservative approach. Could you share some insights on why that might be?