4 ms·
This could be leveraged into a much cheaper (albeit less reliable) version of simple queue service. You can have multiple EC2 instances feeding off of the same
by johnrob 18y ago
This could be leveraged into a much cheaper (albeit less reliable) version of simple queue service. You can have multiple EC2 instances feeding off of the same disk used as a central repository.
In general, EBS is making me think creatively about how to better architect distributed systems. SQS was both expensive and somewhat limited in scope. But now that I get disks in common, there's no restriction as to how I might partition work among EC2s.
- rapind 18y agoSQS got a lot cheaper, I think around Feb this year. Are you sure you aren't going by the old prices? I find it very affordable now. $0.01 per 10,000 requests $0.100 per GB in $0.170 per GB out (less with higher volume). I can't remember exactly, but I think it was only a per request cost before of around $0.10 per 1,000 or something. Also the in/out costs don't apply when they're coming from EC2, which would be the case in your scenario I believe. So from EC2 if you're doing an EC2 based distributed system, you're looking at one dollar per million requests (so for processing a message in a distributed system typically one dollar per 500,000 messages pushed then pulled). Pretty cheap by my standards. Much cheaper than it was at initial launch.