3 ms·
The way billing is done in observability offerings everywhere is so frustrating. CloudWatch metrics is such a footgun that I'm terrified when any engineer on ou
by bilalq 3y ago
The way billing is done in observability offerings everywhere is so frustrating. CloudWatch metrics is such a footgun that I'm terrified when any engineer on our team submits a PR that includes them. It's so easy to accidentally 100-1000x your bill.
I feel like you're always left to choose between obscene pricing models and AbstractSingletonProxyFactoryBeanProvider level "enterprise" configuration.
- phillipcarter 3y agoHmmm, I wouldn't say this is everywhere. There are tools that aren't metrics-based don't charge based on attributes and/or their cardinality. I'm avoiding shilling the place I work for since some of the messaging around "observability 1.0 vs. 2.0" comes from us, but that's kind of the gist of it. If an attribute is important for debugging something later you shouldn't have to pay 100x the cost to be able to use it. Unfortunately, when you're using a "1.0" type tool such as CloudWatch or DD Metrics you end up needing to guess the economic cost of data you include and measure it against perceived economic value later down the line, which is a terrible experience. (Switching observability tools is no joke though, so I won't say "just switch tools!" -- if the current pains are high it may be worth it, but there's no simple way to switch that I've seen)