Credit allocation in an ArcGIS Online organization needs to include storage

02-24-2017 01:39 PM
Status: Open
New Contributor III

I know Esri recently added the ability to see storage size by user, but use of credits this way cannot be managed with the current credit allocation system.  It would be great to be able to put a limit on this for each user.

Tags (1)

I am working with a large city that also shared the need to include storage in the user-level, credit allocation budgets. Having access to this information will help them manage the budgets and identify users that might want to publish content through ArcGIS Enterprise instead. #credit allocation


This is a MAJOR issue.  Last year, most of our ArcGIS Online credits were consumed by a few users who uploaded large amounts of test data and didn't delete it.  All of those users had a 50 credit limit that should have prevented this.  This year it almost happened again.


ESRI has GOT to provide a way to limit usage of data storage credits.

Here's a question where I describe the issue we had in detail.

Why aren't ArcGIS Online data usage credits charged to a user's credit limit? 


We're in the same boat, and have actually had a few TS cases where we've had to unravel storage issues. However, I'd amend the idea somewhat so org admins can use Roles to configure what type of user will be subject to storage firewalls as part of their default credit allocation. In this scenario, we can limit users to so many credits and so many bytes. If you need to go beyond that, then we'll use a different account that has a different role with a different storage firewall. That way we're not granting a user, say, a temporary 100 GB budget then forgetting to remove the cap later, and org admins tend to keep a sharper eye on those accounts with the special limits. 


That's a great idea, Thomas.  That should be baked into the solution when it comes.


Or easier to do, allocate max storage the way we can credits, set a default at new user creation, and change that on case by case basis. 


This idea is definitely necessary! It would also be extremely helpful for dividing costs internally within an organization if we were able to run a report that summarizes all credit usage (storage included!!) by a user for specific time periods - and not just the size of their feature services, but the resulting credit cost for the time period selected. Trying to convert the size into an actual credit consumption is impossible to do if you aren't sure exactly how long a service was published or deleted, since credits are charged on an hourly basis.

Within each user, if the report could also summarize the storage credit usage based on the folders a user has, or based on a selected tag, that would enable us to see storage credit usage for individual projects a user is working on, and not just their overarching total usage. When you work on many projects that all have different clients, and you want to be able to accurately account for credits based on each project, this is essential.


We need to allocate credits to a specific group so that as a consultant, I can manage multiple groups and their projects without having one group 'eat up' the credits that was purchased by or for another group/project. #managecredits 


Agree! We want to have users which can publish their stuff in AGOL. But administrators have responsibility (also financial) for AGOL credits. In recent situation I can't prevent any users, who needs to publish his stuff, to drain out our organisations credist even they had set limits. Limits for users should include also storage!


Agreed! Allowing credit allocation to include storage or provide an option for a storage cap on feature datasets for user accounts would really help admins prevent users from over-consuming credits!