241–250 of 359 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup, I'm aware of reserved instances (from an AWS PoV) but I always assumed they were, at least theoretically, well, reserved!
Reminds me of the classic Seinfeld car reservation bit: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4T2GmGSNvaM
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I need big m4n instances with 100gbe for product demos, and spinning them up lately is like trying to get Taylor Swift tickets on Ticketmaster. We end up wasting money running them for days at a time instead of on demand because we’re afraid of losing them. It’s infuriating that AWS doesn’t have an API that returns a list of AZs with available inventory for a given instance type.
Why not run them elsewhere? There’s lots of providers apart from AWS/Azure/GCP. Or buy a machine and put it in your office. Self hosting can often be cheaper and more available and probably faster than using a cloud.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's worth pointing out that every cloud is the same when it comes to capacity / capacity risk. They all apply a lot of time and effort to figuring out the optimal amount of capacity to order based on track record of both customer demand and supply chain satisfaction. Too much capacity is money spent getting no return, up front capex, ongoing opex, physical space in facilities etc. On cloud scales (averaged out over…
It may be a risk borne by every cloud provider, but why does this only really happen to Microsoft among large providers? As far as chip shortages, it probably helps that Amazon makes its own chips. Microsoft could do the same rather than running out of capacity and blaming chip shortages. Microsoft had to know that at some point they were going to run out of capacity. They should've either did something about it or l…
Oof, that sucks and I feel for you. That said... > setting up in a new region would be complicated for us. Sounds to me like you've got a few weeks to get this working. Deprioritize all other work, get everyone working on this little DevOps/Infra project. You should've been multi-region from the outset, if not multi-cloud. When using the public cloud, we do tend to take it all for granted and don't even think about t…
"Multi-cloud from the outset" is probably the single-worst generic cloud advice that I think anyone could be given. In professional cloud consulting the rule of thumb is to do one cloud with excellence until you even think about another one. And even that is really just kicking the conversational can, as both becoming excellent and actually needing multi-cloud combined is one-in-a-billion.
Azure Germany is a separate partition from the rest of Azure - presumably for compliance reasons. This is distinct from AWS, where Frankfurt is just another region, albeit one with high demand.
> AWS .. Frankfurt is just another region Unlike GCP and Azure, all AWS regions are (were) partitioned by design. This "blast radius" is (was) fantastic for resilience, security, and data sovereignty. It is (was) incredibly easy to be compliant in AWS, not to mention the ruggedness benefits. AWS customers with more money than cloud engineers kept clamoring for cross-region capabilities ("Like GCP has!"), and in last…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's worth pointing out that every cloud is the same when it comes to capacity / capacity risk. They all apply a lot of time and effort to figuring out the optimal amount of capacity to order based on track record of both customer demand and supply chain satisfaction. Too much capacity is money spent getting no return, up front capex, ongoing opex, physical space in facilities etc. On cloud scales (averaged out over…
In my experience there are differences between clouds so while all have the same basic problem in practice some may be better than others. I've never had issues getting GPUs on AWS but GCP constantly has issues with GPU/TPU capacity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In the meantime you can still commit to reserved instances, there is just not a guarantee of getting those instances when you need them. ... wait, what? How are they defining 'reserved'?
It's a billing mechanism. You pay less if you guarantee use. Sadly, they don't guarantee availability of things to use :)
I think there is some general rule in business that you should not depend on a provider that if they lost your business it would be less then one percent of their revenue. Or be ready when they drop the guillotine.
For anyone getting started, that means no dependencies at all. Even colocating would be out of the question, according to your metric.
(You could depend on another startup with no revenue).
> We never thought our startup would be threatened by the unreliability of a company like Microsoft You're new to Azure I guess. I'm glad the outage I had yesterday was only the third major one this year, though the one in august made me lose days of traffic, months of back and forth with their support, and a good chunk of my sanity and patience in face of blatant documented lies and general incompetence. One consume…
I've worked with both Azure and AWS professionally and both have had their fair share of "too many outages" or capacity issues. At this point, you basically must go multi-region to ensure capacity and even better if you can go multi-cloud.
I’ve heard from a friend who works at Microsoft that due to energy crisis in Europe plus their data locality laws, Microsoft is indeed running short on datacenter capacity there and can’t do anything about it no matter how much they are willing to spend.