3 ms·
Serverless is for uses cases with unpredictable load. Bare metal is cheaper, but you're paying 100% of the time for your peak traffic. If you only have a coupl
by pier25 6y ago
Serverless is for uses cases with unpredictable load.
Bare metal is cheaper, but you're paying 100% of the time for your peak traffic. If you only have a couple of peaks with 250k concurrent connections, with serverless you'd pay much less than €1500 but still be able to satisfy that demand.
- layoric 6y agoTaking steps a bit further, it would be interesting to know what variation saves what money. Eg if your load is 80% of the time between 80-100k connections but the 20% at 250k, you save $500 a month using serverless or vice versa. Is it as simple as $60k/number of connections? If so the cross over point would be just 6250 connections as your base load. IMO, that $1500 server starts to look very appealing very quickly but I imagine it isn't as simple as that.