10 ms·
IMHO self hosting your database (even in the cloud) is the best way to do it. You have control over the version. You have control over features. You have con
by eric4smith 5y ago
IMHO self hosting your database (even in the cloud) is the best way to do it.
You have control over the version.
You have control over features.
You have control over performance.
It’s tons cheaper for greater performance - especially when you go over a few hundred gigs.
Yes, the hosted ones have built in replication - but my data is far too valuable to put in the hands of a third party. If they lost it - they could only shrug and say sorry and that’s it. The TOS indemnifies them.
I think it’s kind of honestly lazy — to not take the management of your data in your hands if you run a database of any significant size.
That being said, we do replicate and backup 9 ways to Sunday.
- dataflow 5y ago> self hosting your database (even in the cloud) > my data is far too valuable to put in the hands of a third party Confused, you self-host "in the cloud" without a third party involved? What does that mean? Are you not counting the party hosting your machine?
- ehutch79 5y agoThey're talking about running the db on a vm, setting it up and tuning it themselves. As opposed to a managed solution which is setup and tuned and hosted on a vm controlled by another company.
- dataflow 5y agoI'm still unclear on if the VM here is on a machine they own/on their own premises? Or is it under someone else's control? "In the cloud" sounded like the latter but it sounds like the intention was the former?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- eric4smith 5y agoIt means when you use the database service from AWS, they provision the machines and the replication and the database themselves. Whereas you can get a machine on AWS and setup the database yourself.
- s_fischer 5y agoThey are talking about renting a VM from a cloud provider and setting up the DB themselves (example: EC2) vs renting a fully managed DB from a cloud service provider (example: RDS).
- dataflow 5y agoBut if you're running on a VM from a cloud provider isn't your data still in the hands of a third party..??
- jesterson 5y agoand most importantly, you have control over your DATA.
- grumpy-cowboy 5y agoThis is the MOST important reason no one talk about.
- ies7 5y agoIn my country, after certain size, pg on aws ec2 with a few capable dba/devops salary still cheaper than rds or aurora
- eric4smith 5y agoIn actually most countries. Even the USA. Depending on the size of course.
- reacharavindh 5y agoAs with most things in infrastructure, it is a tradeoff to be considered properly. A startup, where you'd rather have your engineers working on adding features to your product instead of "managing and operating" a database? Have a lot of money to throw at this problem, being aware that you are paying for convenience? then using RDS and such would probably be a better choice. An established company/product with a team of people working at a non-crazy pace, and catering to steady enterprise customers? Would like to build a sustainable long-time infrastructure setup that is optimised for efficiency and cost? running your own Database chosen well for your needs, backed up and tested rigorously, and managed by people who cares for the company's infrastructure would be a better idea. It is weird when large companies with a dedicated platform team choose to run so many databases for their teams/services on a PaaS. That clearly is an optimisation opportunity.
- tester34 5y agoWhat do you mean by "managing and operating" a database? Applying migrations? initial setup and configuration?
- moehm 5y agoI think he means the usual stuff, so monitoring (disk space, memory, disk io, slow queries), patching (following mailing lists, emergency patch on sunday afternoon), failover, scaling (read replicas, multi master), backup, backup restore test, tuning, auth, security etc.
- littlestymaar 5y agoHow does a cloud offering's going to help you with slow queries and tuning? Same for the security part (the biggest threats coming through your app anyway).
- moehm 5y agoHonestly, I don't know and would like to know as well. Can you share some insights into how much a cloud database allows to be tuned? I haven't used a cloud offering before, but OP was asking about managing and operating a database. And that list is what we do at work or at home.
- hypertele-Xii 5y agoAnd every thing you have control over you are also responsible for maintaining. If that's your thing, ok, but not everyone wants to be a DBA all day.
- anonfornoreason 5y agoself hosting a now 300gb database using mariadb, been in production for 14 years with almost no downtime and very good performance. i do not DBA all day, i do it maybe once a year to do a version upgrade. this perception of having to be special or only focus on sysadmin stuff for self hosting is incredible. cloud providers have managed diamond cartel levels of consumer propaganda in the tech sphere, its pretty amazing once you notice it.
- hypertele-Xii 5y agoIt's not perception, it's empirical evidence. Every thing I've set up myself is another thing I'm responsible for maintaining. Each and every one of them generates some baseline of stress, because there's only so many things I can juggle in my head at once. I'm relieved when a concentrated economic effort allows me to throw money at something I'd rather replace with doing something else, something I like doing.
- mattmanser 5y agoAt the early startup stages, you barely have to touch it. It'll just merrily run without intervention for months. At the stage where you need to spend a few hours a month dealing with it, you can afford to hire a DBA.