3 ms·
This sentence sums up one of my main reasons for appreciating AWS: The hourly rate for the use of an Application Load Balancer is 10% lower than the cost of a
by sturgill 10y ago
This sentence sums up one of my main reasons for appreciating AWS:
The hourly rate for the use of an Application Load Balancer is 10% lower than the cost of a Classic Load Balancer.
They frequently introduce new features while cutting costs.
- nivertech 10y agono, they replaced bandwidth costs with new pricing component $0.008 per LCU-hour[1]. If you have 1M idle websocket connections you will pay 100 times more for ALB vs ELB (i.e. $2K/mo vs $18/mo). Good thing ELB is still here, so you can choose between them depending on your workload. [1] LCU - Load Balancer Capacity Units https://aws.amazon.com/elasticloadbalancing/applicationloadbalancer/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/elasticloadbalancing/applicationloadb...
- sturgill 10y agoI don't believe classic ELB supports websockets[1] making this a tenuous comparison. There might be workarounds that I'm not aware of (our production network isn't currently on AWS so I'm a couple of years behind in my day-to-day experience with them). That said, I don't dispute that there might be use cases where classic ELB is a better option. And I'm glad it's still available (as opposed to ALB replacing classic). [1]https://aws.amazon.com/elasticloadbalancing/classicloadbalancer/faqs/ https://aws.amazon.com/elasticloadbalancing/classicloadbalan...
- nivertech 10y agoit supports any TCP-based protocol, like websockets or MQTT, similar to Network LB on GCE.