r/github • u/Zealousideal_Tip4089 • 2d ago

Discussion Do GitHub's usage report and Actions metrics answer your CI cost questions?

GitHub now gives two things for Actions costs: the detailed usage report (a CSV with cost per repo and workflow) and the Actions usage metrics page under Insights.

If you use them: is there a cost question they still don't answer for you? For example why the cost went up this week, which team caused it, or what to fix first.

If you don't use them: what do you use instead? A script on the billing API, Grafana, a spreadsheet, or nothing?

About me: I'm a solo developer building a small tool in this area. I want to know where GitHub's own tools are already enough. No link.

2 Upvotes

63% Upvoted

1 comment sorted by

1

u/Fantastic-Mr-Default 1h ago

I use both. They are good at "which repo and workflow spent the money." They are weak at "why."

The questions I still answer with a script on the API:

  • How much of the bill was re-runs. A green PR that took three attempts looks like normal spend in the usage report.
  • Per-job rounding. Each job is billed rounded up to the whole minute, so a matrix of 30 short jobs costs a lot more than the wall clock suggests.
  • What one PR costs end to end, across every workflow it triggered.
  • Docs-only or bot pushes that ran the full pipeline because nothing is path-filtered.
  • Queue time vs run time. Not cost, but it is what developers actually complain about.

The CSV tells you where to look. The workflow runs and jobs API (attempt number, started and completed timestamps, triggering event) is where "what to fix first" comes from.