3 ms·
That doesn't sound at all bad. You were using more resources than you were paying for and they asked you to upgrade afterwards. I'm assuming that they didn't fo
by Hamuko 6y ago
That doesn't sound at all bad. You were using more resources than you were paying for and they asked you to upgrade afterwards. I'm assuming that they didn't force you to automatically upgrade.
- simplyinfinity 6y agoThey basically forced us to sign a contract. They didn't implement any resource usage checks, so you could use more than you were paying for, without any notification of excess usage. They do this so they can force retain customers. Any normal company that has usage based pricing sends you the actual bill at the end of the month. Not in this case. In this case you (the customer) have to monitor your own usage and buy licenses dynamically leaving a huge room for error since there are 0 warnings/limits "you are using more than you are paying", when this can be achieved by the system itself.
- luckylion 6y ago> That doesn't sound at all bad. "Wait for a year until the bill is high enough instead of telling them after a week that they probably have missed adding those licences and it's going to cost them $x more if they wish to keep using those extra users". Yeah, sounds not bad at all.
- Hamuko 6y agoI don't think New Relic does retroactive charging. I think we were using more New Relic resources than we had paid for by accident and nothing really came out of it. We just fixed the issue and continued with the plan.