4 ms·
Serverless V2 is also shit. The minimal one equivalent ACU to a regular instance has lots of latency spikes and much slower than a t3 instance. We also tried s
by CSDude 3y ago
Serverless V2 is also shit. The minimal one equivalent ACU to a regular instance has lots of latency spikes and much slower than a t3 instance.
We also tried serverless Redis. We have a tiny machine at %10 CPU utilization, but sustained queries. It costs 20x more. We were very afraid of the result we just ran it for an hour to get an idea.
Serverless, pay per use sounds only good if you have very few or unusual traffic.
We just run a monolithic but stateless Spring Boot Application and a dedicated RDS instance with reader in stand by. Only serverless dependency is SQS because it works nice enough. This simple infra has allowed us to iterate and pivot our startup very fast as needed. We still need more customers though.
- RhodesianHunter 3y agoYeah, the only systems likely to see real benefits from serverless are those with infrequent and intermittent traffic.
- Buttons840 3y ago> Serverless, pay per use sounds only good if you have very few or unusual traffic. And most of those cases can be handled by a $5 a month instance. Thus, usually, the most serverless can save you is $5 a month. I suppose the real appeal of serveless is you don't have to worry about maintaining the server, doing updates, etc.