8 ms·
I've never seen (healthy) fleets with average CPU utilization above 70-80%. That includes several-thousand machine fleets when I worked at Amazon. Most things I
by discodave 5y ago
I've never seen (healthy) fleets with average CPU utilization above 70-80%. That includes several-thousand machine fleets when I worked at Amazon. Most things I've seen in my career have 10-20% utilization at best. The Lambda "premium" over EC2 is only like 30-50%, so unless your workload is super consistent/predictable, and your code/hardware is well optimized, then Lambda will likely win on price. This is even more true now that you don't have to pay for API Gateway.
- buzzdenver 5y agoThis is relevant for CPU bound loads. Lots of lambdas do networking stuff where 90+% of the time is waiting for an HTTP download.
- recuter 5y agoI have. AdTech frequently runs close to 100%. Cryptomining style. I'm not sure I agree, why Lambda and not AWS spot instances? Or heaven forbid, one beefy server / office warmer. Lambda doesn't win on price it wins on flexibility.
- jjeaff 5y agoAs others have mentioned, one advantage is that lambda gives you the kind of uptime that would require at least 3 VMs spread across different AZs. But then, I have been running my SaaS on a single, rented beefy bare metal server in a data center with unmetered data and have had no more than 15 minutes of downtime per year for 3 years now.
- recuter 5y agoExactly, you've answered yourself. Also nothing prevents you from using multi zoned auto scaling group with a min/max of 1, you'll fail over to another AZ gracefully. You don't magically get 9 nines with lambda in practice either, trust me.