6 ms·
It's not outrageously expensive if you have hit the limits of of Postgres or MySQL or need multi-region replication, but yes, for small amounts of data there's
by puzzle 9y ago
It's not outrageously expensive if you have hit the limits of of Postgres or MySQL or need multi-region replication, but yes, for small amounts of data there's too much overhead from all the redundancy.
Using it for Vault makes more sense if you are already storing other, larger amounts of data. Then the incremental cost is much smaller and more than worth it.
- hjnilsson 9y agoYes, the pricing for Spanner is fair for what it offers in production (and test). But I really think there should be a cheaper way to use it for dev purposes (and for trying it out). Either running an emulator locally, or on a micro instance equivalent in the cloud.
- qaq 9y agoA Spanner setup that will outperform PostgreSQL on a hefty x86 box will run you close to 150-200K a month.
- puzzle 9y agoA hefty box is a SPOF, so that's an apple to oranges comparison. How do you upgrade that machine to a newer Postgres version?
- Thaxll 9y agohaha, so you run million of users out of a single box, no HA, sharding, backup / re-import that takes hours ect ... please... It's not all about performance, it's about running a business that's up most of the time.
- qaq 9y agoDid I ever claim millions of users? I said a spanner setup that will outperform PG on big x86 box will cost 150-200K per month. All issues you outline are trivial to solve.
- nemothekid 9y agoHA is trivial...?
- qaq 9y agoPatroni