4 ms·
"Our old server infrastructure cost thousands of dollars each month just for server costs. Using the new Lambda infrastructure, we pay for the number of Lambda
by motoboi 11y ago
"Our old server infrastructure cost thousands of dollars each month just for server costs.
Using the new Lambda infrastructure, we pay for the number of Lambda invocations, the total duration of the requests, and the number of S3 requests. This comes out to $60/monthfor hundreds of thousands of CRISPR searches!"
Well, how much of that money you spent on EBS storage for your copies of genome data?
EC2 instances could read from S3 directly as lambda does, maybe that could alleviate the cost a lot.
Using AMI S3 backed instances could save a lot too.
But great work, nonetheless!
- vineetg 11y agoEBS costs are actually fairly small ($9 a month per instance for 90GB). More than 95% of our costs were just paying for the EC2 servers.
- ac360 11y agoRight. My friend is refactoring an app at his company right now, using only Lambda via JAWS and we ran some numbers on the cost savings. He's retiring 2 EC2 c3.large instances which were costing $2.97/day. On Lambda the app will cost $0.05/day. We don't hear about it nearly enough yet, but the cost savings of building apps on Lambda are huge. Then you add in the time saved on devops... and you realize how seriously disruptive this tech is.
- hyperpallium 11y agoYes, this is the key point of microservices: it's not the modularity, nor cross-language nor "webscale" etc. It's cheaper, because more efficient use of resources, because finer-grained. Each component of an app only gets what it needs; and the vendor can sell that unused capacity to someone else. Geometrically speaking, finer grains pack tighter, wasting less space. They also utilize multi-core effectively.