cost-optimization-audit
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseCost Optimization Audit
成本优化审计
Step 1: Gather context
步骤1：收集背景信息
Ask the user:
What workload or AWS environment would you like me to audit for cost optimization? Please share:
- Architecture overview (services used, rough monthly spend if known)
- Traffic patterns (steady, spiky, predictable growth, seasonal)
- Commitment status (Savings Plans, Reserved Instances, existing contracts)
- Budget constraints or targets (optional)
If context is already provided, proceed directly.
询问用户：
您希望我对哪个工作负载或AWS环境进行成本优化审计？请分享：
- 架构概述（使用的服务，若已知大致月度支出）
- 流量模式（稳定型、峰值型、可预测增长型、季节性）
- 承诺型定价状态（Savings Plans、Reserved Instances、现有合约）
- 预算限制或目标（可选）
若已提供背景信息，直接进入下一步。
Step 2: Identify waste
步骤2：识别成本浪费
Classify each finding by severity:
- 🔴 High — significant ongoing waste (>20% of category spend or >$500/month)
- 🟡 Medium — moderate waste (5-20% of category spend or $100-500/month)
- 🟢 Low — minor waste or optimization opportunity
Look for:
- Idle resources — unattached EBS volumes, unused Elastic IPs, idle load balancers, stopped instances with attached storage
- Over-provisioned resources — instances with <20% CPU/memory utilization, over-sized RDS instances, over-provisioned DynamoDB capacity
- Orphaned resources — old snapshots, unused AMIs, stale log groups, abandoned S3 buckets
- Redundant data transfer — cross-AZ traffic that could be avoided, NAT Gateway costs for S3/DynamoDB (use VPC endpoints)
按严重程度对每个发现进行分类：
- 🔴 高 — 持续存在的重大浪费（占分类支出的20%以上或每月超500美元）
- 🟡 中 — 中度浪费（占分类支出的5-20%或每月100-500美元）
- 🟢 低 — 轻微浪费或优化机会
重点排查：
- 闲置资源 — 未挂载的EBS卷、未使用的Elastic IPs、闲置负载均衡器、已停止但仍挂载存储的实例
- 过度配置的资源 — CPU/内存利用率低于20%的实例、规格过大的RDS实例、过度配置的DynamoDB容量
- 孤立资源 — 旧快照、未使用的AMI、过期日志组、废弃的S3存储桶
- 冗余数据传输 — 可避免的跨可用区流量、访问S3/DynamoDB产生的NAT Gateway成本（建议使用VPC endpoints）
Step 3: Evaluate pricing models
步骤3：评估定价模型
Assess:
- Are Savings Plans or Reserved Instances used for steady-state workloads?
- Could Spot Instances cover fault-tolerant or batch workloads?
- Would serverless (Lambda, Fargate, Aurora Serverless) reduce cost for variable workloads?
- Are S3 storage classes optimized? (Intelligent-Tiering, Glacier for archives)
- Is there opportunity for Graviton-based instances? (better price-performance)
- Are data transfer costs optimized? (VPC endpoints, CloudFront, regional placement)
评估以下内容：
- 稳态工作负载是否使用了Savings Plans或Reserved Instances？
- Spot Instances是否可用于容错型或批处理工作负载？
- 无服务器架构（Lambda、Fargate、Aurora Serverless）是否能降低可变工作负载的成本？
- S3存储类是否已优化？（Intelligent-Tiering、Glacier用于归档）
- 是否有使用Graviton实例的机会？（性价比更高）
- 数据传输成本是否已优化？（VPC endpoints、CloudFront、区域部署）
Step 4: Assess architecture efficiency
步骤4：评估架构效率
Evaluate:
- Could caching reduce compute/database load? (ElastiCache, CloudFront, DAX)
- Are there synchronous calls that could be async? (SQS, EventBridge — reduces over-provisioning)
- Is data lifecycle managed? (S3 lifecycle policies, RDS snapshot retention, log expiration)
- Are environments right-sized for their purpose? (dev/test smaller than prod, scheduled scaling)
- Can non-production environments be scheduled off during nights/weekends?
评估以下内容：
- 缓存是否能降低计算/数据库负载？（ElastiCache、CloudFront、DAX）
- 是否存在可转为异步调用的同步调用？（SQS、EventBridge — 减少过度配置）
- 数据生命周期是否已管理？（S3生命周期策略、RDS快照保留期、日志过期设置）
- 环境规格是否与其用途匹配？（开发/测试环境小于生产环境、定时伸缩）
- 非生产环境能否在夜间/周末定时关闭？
Step 5: Quantify savings
步骤5：量化节省金额
For each recommendation, estimate:
- Current cost (monthly)
- Projected cost after change
- Savings ($ and %)
- Effort to implement (Low / Medium / High)
- Risk of the change
- AWS Service to use
针对每个建议，估算：
- 当前成本（月度）
- 变更后预计成本
- 节省金额（美元和百分比）
- 实施难度（低/中/高）
- 变更风险
- 需使用的AWS服务
Step 6: Produce the report
步骤6：生成报告
Output:
markdown
undefined输出格式如下：
markdown
undefinedCost Optimization Audit: {Workload Name}
成本优化审计：{工作负载名称}
Summary
摘要
- Date: {date}
- Estimated current monthly spend: ${X}
- Potential monthly savings: ${Y} ({Z}%)
- Findings: {A} High, {B} Medium, {C} Low
- 日期：{date}
- 当前月度预计支出：${X}
- 月度潜在节省金额：${Y} ({Z}%)
- 发现项：{A} 高优先级，{B} 中优先级，{C} 低优先级
Cost Optimization Scorecard
成本优化评分卡
| Domain | Score (1-5) | Key Gap |
|---|---|---|
| Waste Elimination | {score} | {gap} |
| Pricing Model | {score} | {gap} |
| Architecture Efficiency | {score} | {gap} |
| Data Lifecycle | {score} | {gap} |
| Environment Management | {score} | {gap} |
| 领域 | 评分（1-5） | 关键差距 |
|---|---|---|
| 浪费消除 | {score} | {gap} |
| 定价模型 | {score} | {gap} |
| 架构效率 | {score} | {gap} |
| 数据生命周期 | {score} | {gap} |
| 环境管理 | {score} | {gap} |
High-Impact Findings
高影响发现项
{Each: what's wasteful, severity, current cost, projected savings, AWS service, effort}
{每项：浪费点、严重程度、当前成本、预计节省金额、AWS服务、实施难度}
Quick Wins (< 1 week)
快速见效项（<1周）
{Each: what to do, savings estimate, how to implement, AWS service}
{每项：操作内容、节省金额估算、实施方式、AWS服务}
Foundation Improvements (1-4 weeks)
基础改进项（1-4周）
{Each: what to change, savings estimate, trade-offs, AWS service}
{每项：变更内容、节省金额估算、权衡点、AWS服务}
Strategic Changes (1-3 months)
战略变更项（1-3个月）
{Each: what to redesign, savings estimate, effort, risk, AWS service}
{每项：重构内容、节省金额估算、实施难度、风险、AWS服务}
Savings Summary
节省金额汇总
| Category | Current $/mo | Optimized $/mo | Savings $/mo | AWS Service |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compute | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | Compute Optimizer, Savings Plans |
| Storage | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | S3 Intelligent-Tiering, Glacier |
| Data Transfer | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | VPC Endpoints, CloudFront |
| Database | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | RDS Reserved, Aurora Serverless |
| Other | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | {relevant services} |
| Total | {total} | {total} | {total} |
| 分类 | 当前月度成本（美元） | 优化后月度成本（美元） | 月度节省金额（美元） | AWS服务 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 计算 | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | Compute Optimizer, Savings Plans |
| 存储 | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | S3 Intelligent-Tiering, Glacier |
| 数据传输 | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | VPC Endpoints, CloudFront |
| 数据库 | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | RDS Reserved, Aurora Serverless |
| 其他 | {current} | {optimized} | {savings} | {相关服务} |
| 总计 | {total} | {total} | {total} |
Implementation Roadmap
实施路线图
| Priority | Action | Savings/mo | Effort | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | {action} | ${savings} | Low | Low |
| 2 | {action} | ${savings} | Medium | Low |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
| 优先级 | 操作内容 | 月度节省金额 | 实施难度 | 风险 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | {action} | ${savings} | 低 | 低 |
| 2 | {action} | ${savings} | 中 | 低 |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
Next Steps
下一步行动
{Concrete actions to start saving immediately}
undefined{立即开始节省成本的具体措施}
undefinedStep 7: Offer follow-up
步骤7：提供后续服务
After delivering the report, offer:
Would you like me to:
- Create a detailed right-sizing plan for a specific service?
- Model Savings Plans vs Reserved Instances for your usage pattern?
- Design a FinOps tagging and cost allocation strategy?
- Build a scheduled scaling policy for non-production environments?
- Estimate costs for an architectural alternative (serverless, containers, etc.)?
交付报告后，提供以下选项：
您是否需要我协助：
- 为特定服务制定详细的资源合理调整计划？
- 根据您的使用模式对比Savings Plans与Reserved Instances的效益？
- 设计FinOps标签和成本分配策略？
- 为非生产环境构建定时伸缩策略？
- 估算架构替代方案（无服务器、容器等）的成本？