3 ms·
I find it annoying to have all these pricing per second, and now per millisecond. It's really hard for my mind to visualize what `$0.0000000021 per millisec` ac
by raphaelj 6y ago
I find it annoying to have all these pricing per second, and now per millisecond. It's really hard for my mind to visualize what `$0.0000000021 per millisec` actually is.
Being billed by the millisecond does not mean that you should give a pricing per millisecond.
I prefer Digital Ocean or Heroku's approach of billing by the second, but giving the price per month. How on hell is `$0.0000000021 per millisec` better than `$5/month, billed by the millisecond`? If I know that my workload will be about 20% of a dedicated CPU, I know that I'll end up paying about $1 per month.
- Tehnix 6y agoThere is simply an enourmous amount of assumptions that would go into estimating anything else, because ms is the only correct metric. Lambda billing for a month? What on earth does that say? 10 invocations running 15 minutes? 90,000 invocations running 100ms? (Those two are equivalent btw). If I know my function takes around ~35ms ballpark, and I will probably invoke it 5,000 times per day, then I can calculate my monthly: 0.0000000021 $/ms * 35ms * 5,000 * 30 = 0.011 $/month. AWS usually shows a neat example of usecase and what the billing would be on their pricing pages.
- stkdump 6y agoGotta be sure to have that number of 0s exactly right.