3 ms·
I feel like many people use the cloud "wrong". If you're just standing up VMs then yeah, it's going to be slower and more expensive than renting a physical serv
by tstrimple 4y ago
I feel like many people use the cloud "wrong". If you're just standing up VMs then yeah, it's going to be slower and more expensive than renting a physical server. If you're just going to setup VMs and pretend you're still on-prem you're better off not switching. But I've got projects setup on PaaS services that literally cost a few bucks a month because it's only charging me for actual use and not idle time. I've got some small customers (tens of thousands of users) who I've helped move into the cloud who see the same thing. They have SPA websites backed by lambda functions and on-demand databases. If their website isn't being hit, it's not costing them anything at all. The only lock-in is the boiler plate code around the lambda activation which could be switched fairly easily to target any Functions as a Service platform.
- woadwarrior01 4y agoI'm curious to know what on-demand databases do you use with AWS Lambdas? Two options that I've evaluated are: Aurora Serverless v2, which isn't quite serverless in practice and DynamoDB. And the mental model for DynamoDB very different from that of traditional SQL databases.
- tstrimple 4y agoI’m actually primarily building on Azure with Cosmos DB. The mental model is very different, but I think important if you want to build cheap cloud services. I think that’s the larger point. You have to think about doing things differently in the cloud otherwise you’re just deploying and managing VMs as if you were on-prem albeit with more scaling control. It feels like everyone who is complaining about how expensive cloud hosting is go into it thinking it’s just someone else hosting the VMs where as a VM is the option of last resort for me.