5 ms·
$4/mo doesn't include the cost of monitoring and maintenance that come with running your own instance. When you can't amortize those costs across a large fleet
by curun1r 9y ago
$4/mo doesn't include the cost of monitoring and maintenance that come with running your own instance. When you can't amortize those costs across a large fleet of instances, Lambda is often much cheaper when looking at the total cost. Also, to get anywhere near the same reliability expectations, you'd need at least 2 instances and an ELB. Granted that will be able to handle a lot more traffic, but it's still not fair to compare Lambda to a single instance.
- thallium205 9y agoYou would also need to include a messaging queue infrastructure as lambda offers a dead letter queue. So that will require a few more RabbitMQ ec2 boxes in cluster mode.
- bpicolo 9y agoSQS/SNS + Elastic Beanstalk for queue workers should do the trick?
- thallium205 9y agoOr that, correct. I was just trying to keep it strictly within EC2 for the comparison.