4 ms·
That’s like $24K a year. Assuming they have working failover and business continuity plans, it’s actually a really good deal (vs having a 10-20% time employee
by hedora 1y ago
That’s like $24K a year. Assuming they have working failover and business continuity plans, it’s actually a really good deal (vs having a 10-20% time employee deal with it).
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- whstl 1y agoAWS doesn't get magically expensive just because you put your website there. You don't get to an overcomplicated AWS madness without having a few engineers already pushing complexity. And an overcomplicated setup also means it needs maintenance. There are no personnel savings there.
- hedora 1y agoFor one VM, EBS with backups gives you business continuity. You could get manual failover with a single writer replicated managed Postgres setup and a warm VM. That’s on the order of a thousand a month for a medium workload. It’s probably a 10x markup vs buying the servers, but it doesn’t matter if it saves an employee.
- whstl 1y agoIt doesn’t save employees. Over-complicated infrastructure doesn’t magically appear out of nowhere. Someone has to setup and maintain. It’s expensive.