Leon Le

Please publish official documentation that clearly explains the intended behavior of Dataverse capacity reporting and overage handling for pay-as-you-go (PAYG) environments, specifically covering the two scenarios below, which are currently unclear from documentation and create governance and cost-management confusion for admins.

Scenario 1. “1 GB included entitlement appears as overage (orange) immediately after environment creation”

Observed behavior: After creating a new environment, the tenant capacity summary can show 1 GB database usage as overage (orange) even though PAYG documentation/positioning describes a 1 GB database + 1 GB file included entitlement for PAYG environments. This creates uncertainty for admins trying to validate whether the environment is actually in an overage state vs. simply reflecting UI logic.

Documentation needed:

• What the orange/overage indicator represents in this scenario (billing vs. tenant pool consumption vs. allocation state vs. UI timing).
• Whether the “included at no charge” entitlement is expected to appear as overage in some tenant-level views, and why.

Scenario 2. “Overage handling options are unchecked by default, with no documented fallback when neither is selected”

Observed behavior: In the environment capacity management experience, the overage-handling options (e.g., draw from tenant pool vs bill to PAYG) can appear unchecked by default, and the UI can allow saving without selecting either option. There is no official documentation that explains what happens if capacity is exceeded while neither option is selected (silent fallback vs enforcement vs restrictions).

Documentation needed:

• What the default state is intended to be, and what it means operationally.
• The exact behavior when capacity is exceeded while neither option is selected (including what is blocked, what remains available, and what notifications admins should expect).

Why this matters

These UI behaviors create “gray zones” for tenant administrators: it becomes difficult to explain capacity posture internally, justify configuration decisions, and confidently manage cost exposure and enforcement behavior across environments. Clear documentation of the intended UX and fallback/enforcement rules would reduce confusion and prevent incorrect assumptions.

Proposed outcome

Add a dedicated section (or an FAQ) in official documentation that explicitly defines:

1. How PAYG included entitlement should appear in tenant-level capacity views, including any UI timing/visualization rules.
2. The default meaning of “overage handling” controls and the definitive behavior when neither option is selected.

We would like to request an improvement to the Dataverse capacity warning email experience in Power Platform admin center.

In our scenario, administrators received Dataverse capacity warning emails for the Default environment after File capacity usage appeared to increase unexpectedly. After review, Microsoft Product Group confirmed that this behavior was related to a recent change in how Dataverse capacity is reported. Some existing system data that was previously shown under other storage categories is now being reported under File capacity.

Because of this reporting change, File storage usage may appear to increase in Power Platform admin center. However, this does not necessarily mean that new data was suddenly added to the environment or that a separate background process is unexpectedly consuming more storage. The same existing data is now being presented under a different storage category.

This warning email experience can create confusion and concern for administrators because it may appear as though there is a new storage issue, new business risk, or urgent action required, even when the change is mainly related to how storage is categorized and reported.

We would like Microsoft to improve the Dataverse capacity warning email experience so that administrators can better understand why the warning was triggered. Possible improvements could include:

1. Adding clearer explanation in the warning email when the increase is caused by a reporting or categorization change.

2. Providing more details in Power Platform admin center about which storage category changed and why.

3. Providing an option to suppress, acknowledge, or reduce repeated warning emails when the behavior is already understood.

4. Providing clearer documentation or in-product messaging for cases where existing system data is reclassified under File capacity.

5. Allowing administrators to delegate capacity warning notifications to specific recipients or admin groups.

This improvement would help administrators avoid unnecessary concern, reduce support cases, and better understand whether a capacity warning requires immediate action or is related to a reporting/categorization update.