3 ms·
Regarding offerings on Timescale Cloud around "IO-optimized", "compute-optimized", and "storage-optimized", and particularly that Timescale Cloud runs on all th
by mfreed 6y ago
Regarding offerings on Timescale Cloud around "IO-optimized", "compute-optimized", and "storage-optimized", and particularly that Timescale Cloud runs on all three major clouds (AWS, Azure, GCP) across 76 regions:
This indeed reflects that these different options are using different VM instance types, as well as different storage options, including both local instance storage _and_ remote block storage (EBS).
You can partially see this also in the maximum storage capacity of options, where some service types can do 10TB of storage, while others max out at 500GB. As well as in variety in which options we can offer in which clouds/regions based on the underlying hardware capacities that are available.
(Note this is the maximum sized "disk". Because TimescaleDB's compression on average gets 94-97% storage reductions -- measured across the field -- the amount of raw data you can actually store on these options is much higher. And why also it's not an apples-to-apples price comparison against RDS!)
So it's exposing this tradeoff in performance/price/capacity to users to hopefully find these exact needs. And the good thing is there is a "one-click" fully-online migration between instance types (and regions/clouds), so switching is always quite easy, especially as your usage grows.
- eloff 6y agoThat's really flexible. I think you're missing a chance to show TimescaleDB mopping the floor with RDS on throughput and tail latency on the high IO instances on a cost per transaction basis - for regular Postgres tables and workloads - time series features aside. There's a good blog post waiting there. I didn't know about the one-click online migration, even between regions and clouds, that's huge! It's not a feature RDS will ever have for obvious reasons.