3 ms·

Get ScyllaCloud barrier to entry a bit lower. $200/mo is too much for tinkering. Even better if there is an autoscaling option available.

• PeterCorless 8y ago
  "Stay tuned!" winks and walks away, whistling innocently
• manigandham 8y ago
  Also Google Cloud. We'd be using it now if it were available.
• stubish 8y ago
  It certainly is pricey for tinkering, but it requires a decent chunk of block storage and I was shocked how expensive that is when I looked the other day. It unlikely to be news to most, but I've been on private cloud and DCs for a long time and it seems everyone is charging huge amounts of money if you need large filesystems; not even slow but cheap options. Maybe Scylla needs to be backed by S3 rather than XFS :)
  • ddorian43 8y ago
    Scylladb uses local storage (not EBS) for sane performance. XFS is required for async reads/writes.