3 ms·

Absolutely. You pay for EC2/DO even if your app isn't used. With JAWS, you pay only when your app is used. Here is Lambdas pricing FYI: https://aws.amazon.c

by ac360 11y ago

Absolutely. You pay for EC2/DO even if your app isn't used. With JAWS, you pay only when your app is used. Here is Lambdas pricing FYI: https://aws.amazon.com/lambda/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/lambda/pricing/

sologoub 11y ago
The examples are very interesting, as it's not necessarily cheaper, because if you could handle the same 3 million requests per month with a t2.micro for ~$10 per month, Lambda approach would be close to 2x more expensive. However, the benefit here is that you don't have to provision to peak capacity needs + (some safety fudge factor), thereby having paid for, but idle capacity. It's a very intriguing proposition for new services where you may not be able to optimize costs as much for fear of losing up time, but I'm sure it makes a lot of financial sense for AWS. Nothing stopping this from being a win/win though.
- inopinatus 11y ago
  Here's a problem with cloud economics. People don't compare apples. Essentially, I am not short $10 but I could use some time back in my week. Getting bogged down in managing servers, or a fleet of instances, or the devops stack to automate a fleet of instances; it's all a time sink with either an actual cost or at the very least an opportunity cost, orders of magnitude beyond that $10/month. This is especially true for organisations where provisioning an instance requires an epic chain of approvals "because it's a server". Unfortunate but all too common. Of course if you were planning to become (or already are) a competent devopsy admin then provisioning instances is not necessarily a waste of your time. For everyone else, platform-as-a-service such as Lambda can be an huge win. Sure, there's still a tipping point but it's much greater when time, rather than simply price, is considered. On the other hand, and contrary to the Amazon-is-scalping-me gripes I hear on HN all too frequently, my experience has consistently been that AWS want you to minimise costs due to design. Every well-run business knows the long-term virtuous cycle of satisfied & continuing customers far outweighs a short-term revenue grab. ObDisclosure: I am a former AWS architecture manager but do not speak on behalf of my ex-employer.
  - ac360 11y ago
    Awesome insights. Thanks :)
  - sologoub 11y ago
    Couldn't agree more. The $10 example was in response to the EC2/flask comment earlier in the thread.

by ac360 11y ago

sologoub 11y ago

The examples are very interesting, as it's not necessarily cheaper, because if you could handle the same 3 million requests per month with a t2.micro for ~$10 per month, Lambda approach would be close to 2x more expensive. However, the benefit here is that you don't have to provision to peak capacity needs + (some safety fudge factor), thereby having paid for, but idle capacity. It's a very intriguing proposition for new services where you may not be able to optimize costs as much for fear of losing up time, but I'm sure it makes a lot of financial sense for AWS. Nothing stopping this from being a win/win though.

inopinatus 11y ago
Here's a problem with cloud economics. People don't compare apples. Essentially, I am not short $10 but I could use some time back in my week. Getting bogged down in managing servers, or a fleet of instances, or the devops stack to automate a fleet of instances; it's all a time sink with either an actual cost or at the very least an opportunity cost, orders of magnitude beyond that $10/month. This is especially true for organisations where provisioning an instance requires an epic chain of approvals "because it's a server". Unfortunate but all too common. Of course if you were planning to become (or already are) a competent devopsy admin then provisioning instances is not necessarily a waste of your time. For everyone else, platform-as-a-service such as Lambda can be an huge win. Sure, there's still a tipping point but it's much greater when time, rather than simply price, is considered. On the other hand, and contrary to the Amazon-is-scalping-me gripes I hear on HN all too frequently, my experience has consistently been that AWS want you to minimise costs due to design. Every well-run business knows the long-term virtuous cycle of satisfied & continuing customers far outweighs a short-term revenue grab. ObDisclosure: I am a former AWS architecture manager but do not speak on behalf of my ex-employer.
- ac360 11y ago
  Awesome insights. Thanks :)
- sologoub 11y ago
  Couldn't agree more. The $10 example was in response to the EC2/flask comment earlier in the thread.