Thanks all for the good contributions to this topic. I just started diving into this last night based on the automated “Dear Agency” email subject: Notification: Visit limit exceeded for a site supported by your agency … I’ve been carefully reading this thread and not coming out of it with a good feeling.
Something doesn’t feel right that the sites I was informed about have not seen increases in more common measurements of Site Traffic and yet there is a disproportionate increase with the Pantheon Metrics for Site Traffic.
The pricing comparison between plans shows the basic and performance small plans at the same levels for the Pantheon Metrics. If I am an existing Pantheon customer or a potential customer evaluating the platform it certainly doesn’t seem clear that the Pantheon Metrics will be different than more common measurements in use. I am sure it’s problematic when customer have questions about this after the fact.
It is clear that the level of effort to monitor, properly evaluate or remediate negative factors on a technical level is not trivial.
It’s been stated earlier in this thread that Pantheon is working on providing more actionable reporting information and tools. In the meantime is anyone aware of any external tools which could provide this information without adverse impacts?
I really have appreciated many advantages of the Pantheon Platform, particularly that I generally don’t need to worry about the sysadmin aspects of managing servers. I also don’t think the cost benefit advantage of the platform is out of line.
However, a lot of the issues brought up in this thread make it clear there is is a need to make some corrections to remove the ambiguity with these metrics.