5 ms·

I'm pretty sure that is $0.03/GB/month (rated hourly) for magnetic storage as per the example. It's just written in a confusing way.

by kondro 6y ago

paragraft 6y ago
I saw the examples, but that was even more confusing because I think the maths is wrong on almost all the calcs: From the example: "Writes cost: $ 8.64 per month. This is computed as: ( 2 writes * 100 EC2 instances * 60 minutes * 24 hours * 30 days) * $0.50/ 1 MM writes" I get $4.32 from ((2 * 100 * 60 * 24 * 30) * 0.5) / 1M From the example: "Memory store cost: $ 3.55 per month. This is computed as: ( 2 KB per minute per instance * 100 instances * 60 minutes * 6 hours * 30 days) * $0.036 / GB-hour." For starters I think there needs to be another "* 24 hours" in there - the 6 hours is to account for the retention period, but they're storing that 24 hours a day... But even with that I get $1.87 for the memory store from ((2 * 100 * 60 * 6 * 24 * 30) / 1000000) * 0.036 (the div by 1M is to convert KB to GB) From the example: "Magnetic store cost: $ 5.93 per month. This is computed as: (2 KB per minute per instance * 100 instances * 60 minutes * 24 hours * 30 days * 12 months) * $0.03 /GB-month." But I get $3.11: ((2 * 100 * 60 * 24 * 30 * 12) / 1000000) * 0.03 From the example: "Query cost (alerting queries): $ 7.03 per month. This is computed as (10 MB per alerting query * 100 queries per hour * 24 hours * 30 days * $0.01 / GB). Alerting queries process 5 minutes of data. 5 minutes of data is 1 MB (2 KB per minute per instance * 100 instances * 5), which gets rounded up to 10 MB minimum charge for queries." But I get $7.20 from (10 * 100 * 24 * 30 * 0.01) / 1000 (MB -> GB) It's only on the "Query cost (ad-hoc queries)" that I can make the answer agree. (They have now updated the magnetic price, as noted by others)
- paragraft 6y ago
  For posterity, the above is no longer correct. They updated their example to use 200 EC2 instances, which was most of the disparity, and it seems they do actually use 1024 KB/MB in a KB/MB, while I had in my head from elsewhere in AWS that they don't do that...

I'm pretty sure that is $0.03/GB/month (rated hourly) for magnetic storage as per the example. It's just written in a confusing way.

by kondro 6y ago

I'm pretty sure that is $0.03/GB/month (rated hourly) for magnetic storage as per the example. It's just written in a confusing way.

paragraft 6y ago

I saw the examples, but that was even more confusing because I think the maths is wrong on almost all the calcs: From the example: "Writes cost: $ 8.64 per month. This is computed as: ( 2 writes * 100 EC2 instances * 60 minutes * 24 hours * 30 days) * $0.50/ 1 MM writes" I get $4.32 from ((2 * 100 * 60 * 24 * 30) * 0.5) / 1M From the example: "Memory store cost: $ 3.55 per month. This is computed as: ( 2 KB per minute per instance * 100 instances * 60 minutes * 6 hours * 30 days) * $0.036 / GB-hour." For starters I think there needs to be another "* 24 hours" in there - the 6 hours is to account for the retention period, but they're storing that 24 hours a day... But even with that I get $1.87 for the memory store from ((2 * 100 * 60 * 6 * 24 * 30) / 1000000) * 0.036 (the div by 1M is to convert KB to GB) From the example: "Magnetic store cost: $ 5.93 per month. This is computed as: (2 KB per minute per instance * 100 instances * 60 minutes * 24 hours * 30 days * 12 months) * $0.03 /GB-month." But I get $3.11: ((2 * 100 * 60 * 24 * 30 * 12) / 1000000) * 0.03 From the example: "Query cost (alerting queries): $ 7.03 per month. This is computed as (10 MB per alerting query * 100 queries per hour * 24 hours * 30 days * $0.01 / GB). Alerting queries process 5 minutes of data. 5 minutes of data is 1 MB (2 KB per minute per instance * 100 instances * 5), which gets rounded up to 10 MB minimum charge for queries." But I get $7.20 from (10 * 100 * 24 * 30 * 0.01) / 1000 (MB -> GB) It's only on the "Query cost (ad-hoc queries)" that I can make the answer agree. (They have now updated the magnetic price, as noted by others)

paragraft 6y ago
For posterity, the above is no longer correct. They updated their example to use 200 EC2 instances, which was most of the disparity, and it seems they do actually use 1024 KB/MB in a KB/MB, while I had in my head from elsewhere in AWS that they don't do that...