4 ms·
Anecdotally I tend to agree with the author. But this really isn't a great way of comparing cloud services. The fundamental problem with cloud reliability is t
by lacker 4y ago
Anecdotally I tend to agree with the author. But this really isn't a great way of comparing cloud services.
The fundamental problem with cloud reliability is that it depends on a lot of stuff that's out of your control, that you have no visibility into. I have had services running happily on AWS with no errors, and the next month without changing anything they fail all the time.
Why? Well, we look into it and it turns out AWS changed something behind the scenes. There's a different underlying hardware behind the instance, or some resource started being in high demand because of some other customers.
So, I completely believe that at the time of this test, this particular API was performing a lot better on AWS than on GCP. But I wouldn't count on it still performing this way a month later. Cloud services aren't like a piece of dedicated hardware where you test it one month, and then the next month it behaves roughly the same. They are changing a lot of stuff that you can't see.
- citizenpaul 4y agoThat was my thoughts. People are probably pummeling GCP GPU free tier right now with stable diffusion image generators. Since it seems like all the free plug and play examples use the google python notebooks.
- RajT88 4y agoInstance types and regions make a big difference. Some regions and hardware generations are just busier than others. It may not be the same across cloud providers (although I suspect it is similar given the underlying market forces).
- ryukoposting 4y agoYou've just perfectly characterized why on-site infrastructure will always have its place.
- callalex 4y agoYou can reserve capacity on both of these services as well.