The rule of growth : 196

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I laughed :)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago

Oh goodness, why is this so funny? lol.

blobhaj, ani, hearts, animated

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago

Yay!

[+] [email protected] 149 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (7 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 81 points 2 years ago (1 children)

To be fair, with a proper autoscaling scheme in place these services should scale down significantly when not in use.

That being said, a big reason for using AWS/GCP is all the additional services that are available on the platform.. If the workload being run isn't that complicated, the hyperscalers are probably overkill. Even DO or Linode would be a better option under those circumstances.

[–] [email protected] 60 points 2 years ago (3 children)

This. AWS architect here. There are a lot of ways to reduce pricing in AWS like horizontal scaling, serverless functions, reserved instances. Most people aren't aware of it and if you're going to dive in head first into something like cloud, you'll need to bear the consequences and then learn eventually.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Even with ASGs, ec2 costs a bomb for performance.

And "serverless" functions are a trap.

If you're gonna commit to reserved instances, just buy hardware for goodness sake, its a 3 year commitment with a huge upfront spend.

[–] rolaulten 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You can do one year dedicated spend.

But yes. Serverless is a trap to be avoided.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Mark my words the loop is coming back around. I look forward to when my work migrates the datacenter off AWS back on prem because of ballooning costs.

You work in IT long enough you see it for the joke it is. We get paid obscene amounts of money to do what amounts to nothing.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yep. And if you want to really save some cash and don't mind getting a little crazy, use an EKS node orchestrator that supports spot instances. I'm starting to do a serious dive into Harness at the moment actually.

Google recently released a white paper on cost saving in kubernetes as well.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If you've got a kubernetes cluster running on 10 different spot instances, isn't there a risk that all ten could be revoked at the same time? Even if they are built out across regions and availability zones?

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm in a similar boat. I'm a sysadmin supporting a legacy application running on AWS EC2 instances and a new 'serverless' microservice based platform as well. It's really really hard to scale and optimize anything running on EC2s unless you really know what you're doing or the application is designed with clustering in mind.

You tend to end up sizing instances based on peak load and then wasting capacity 90% of the time (and burning through cash like crazy). I can imagine a lot of Lemmy admins are overspending so fast they give up before they figure it out.

[–] Dasnap 5 points 2 years ago

Nowadays I feel like EC2 is either used for legacy support or testing. Most prod nowadays should probably be built with some kind of container solution so you can scale it easier.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 years ago

AWS is perfect for large operations that value stability and elasticity over anything else.

It's very easy to just spin up a thousand extra servers for momentary demand or some new exciting project. It's also easy to locate multiple instances all over the world for low latency with your users.

If you know you're going to need a couple servers for years and have the hardware knowhow, then it's cheaper to do it yourself for sure.

It's also possible to use aws more efficiently if you know all of their services. I ran a small utils website for my friends and I on it a while ago and it was essentially free since the static files were tiny and on s3 and the backend was lambda which gives you quite a few free calls before charging.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Habit (guess). Its what is used professionally, despite being proven over and over that cost-per-speed is terrible compared to less known providers.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (3 children)

If the average Web engineer's salary capable of running a site like this is ~$180,000, then a $30,000 difference in cost is only about 2 months salary. Learning and dealing with a new hosting environment can easily exceed that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In the short term, sure. If you can invest in your future, wouldn't switching be a good thing down the line?

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That, and like others mentioned their flexibility, plus the fact that they're fairly reliable (maybe less than some good Iaas providers but a fair bit more than your consumer vps places). Moments ago I went to the hetzner site to check them out and got:

Status Code 504 Gateway Timeout

The upstream server failed to send a request in the time allowed by the server. If you are the Administrator of the Upstream, check your server logs for errors.

Annoying if it's you nextloud instance down for a minutes, but a worthy trade off if you're paying 1/4 of the price. Extremely costly for big business or even risking peoples's lives for a few different very important systems.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hetzner ftw

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

Hetzner is one of the most cost effective but I recommend always checking serverhunter before choosing

[–] c1177johuk 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

AWS is mostly only useful for large companies who need one hosting provider for all their needs, with every single product tightly integrated into other products

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Hmm like SAP, but less sucky

[–] CertifiedBlackGuy 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Holy fuck SAP sucks ass

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Can you point the everyone else? Just out of curiosity. I know there’s digital ocean but I’m not quite sure they’re cheaper than azure/aws

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

For the past 5 years i just check server hunter and get the specs I want: https://www.serverhunter.com

Before that, my preferred 'everyone else' was OVH.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] MooseBoys 74 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Figure 1: Human discovers that hosting a web service for hundreds of thousands of users is expensive.

[+] [email protected] 23 points 2 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] MooseBoys 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

“Biggest node” by what metric? A 10€/mo VPS will typically be time-sliced 10% of a single modern CPU core with 8GB shared memory that can maybe handle a few dozen concurrent users.

Meanwhile, to get to $27,000/mo on EC2 you’d need to be using 10 instances of 128-core 256GB machines with quad 2TB SSDs. So either whoever priced the AWS quote massively over-provisioned compared to their real demand, or Feddit is an incredibly tiny node by comparison. The reality is probably a combination of the two.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 2 years ago

Hetzner crowd says hi!

[–] filister 25 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Why don't you migrate to cheaper providers like Hetzner? I mean AWS is extremely expensive for what they are and I am pretty sure there are hundreds of people out here who will willingly help you set it up.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Oracle free tier, 4arm cores, 200gb storage, 24gb ram, zero money's spent

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Oracle is all fun and games until they lose your instance’s IP or data and don’t give it back because you’re a free tier freeloader.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago

That sounds like the bitter expression of regret and experience.

[–] hyper 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

thats why you make backups and update the dns records 😎

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I do enough of this in the day job. I don’t have time to mess around with free hosting to save $20 a month.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Amen.

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

I got a bunch of servers on OCI, but I'd never rely on it heavily without a backup plan or lack of attachment

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No catch? Especially with Oracle? Hard to believe kinda, nothing is ever "free".

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I host mine on my home wifi

[–] showmustgo 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm in your walls

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I thought that was a rat colony

[–] bachatero 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

And rats make me crazy.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago

Rome wasn’t built in a day

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 years ago

linode whenthe

[+] [email protected] 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Some of us have a capitalist bondage kink

load more comments (1 replies)