121–130 of 179 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Awesome, would you mind sending me an email (in profile), I'd like to pick your brain a bit further.
We were sharing the same office for over a year [geekdom]. You can find my email in of the discussion chains.
I can't imagine why you'd guys need 25,000 servers. Your G bill at a minimum must be over 5 million a month. I could be wrong, but those numbers don't add up too me.
What instance type are you running?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I may be missing something, why is bare metal better in this case (immutable/premptible servers)?
Just the sheer number of instances the OP is using has put the usage FAR into the territory where the premiums spent on virtualized instance costs far outweigh any clever strategy one might use to make things cheaper in the cloud. It has nothing to do with what the infrastructure is, and everything to do with raw volume.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AWS requires that you request exact type and location for your instances Are you running 25k without using Spot Fleets? Spot fleets let you specify value per instance type, and then total value you need. ("Value" could be CPU, memory, network or whatever) AWS will maintain the lowest cost spot instances that fulfill your requirements.
We couldn't even get them to approve 5k servers on AWS. We run everything in GCE.
One reason why I still can't use GCE in 2016. No PostgreSQL support for CloudSQL. I can find alternatives for other services, but I don't want to compromise on the choice of relational database. Note: I understand there are third-party providers for PostgreSQL, but I'd rather have Google's.
Have you found any compelling hosted Postgres RDS alternatives?
[1] - https://www.elephantsql.com/
[2] - https://aiven.io/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We couldn't even get them to approve 5k servers on AWS. We run everything in GCE.
That is hard to believe. Their case studies have organizations using thousands or tens of thousands of servers for scientific computing, etc.
One reason why I still can't use GCE in 2016. No PostgreSQL support for CloudSQL. I can find alternatives for other services, but I don't want to compromise on the choice of relational database. Note: I understand there are third-party providers for PostgreSQL, but I'd rather have Google's.
Googlers on HN have commented before that they're working on it. No ETA, though. With AWS now offering both plain-old PostgreSQL and souped-up-PostgreSQL-on-Aurora [1], whatever Google produces needs to be great in order to compete. However, I fear they'll initially come out with something that's on par with the current MySQL support in Cloud SQL, which is just a vanilla MySQL server behind a UI/API. (For example, Cl…
TBH, I don't need Aurora-level performance (although it would be a nice option in the future), I'm just happy to have a vendor-managed PostgreSQL instance with granular price points.
C'mon Google! :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unless they're really bursty Last I checked. AWS has hourly billing and Google Cloud has sub-hour billing. If they are really bursty, they are in troubles with AWS pricing model. > the number where it makes more economic sense to build out your own data center. I would think that this number doesn't exist... unless you have already built datacenters for yourselves and you have a major internal expertise in that.
I can tell you less than 1000 servers in AWS runs around 200-300k US / month I am not sure what he is doing at 25k servers but you can see real world math puts this in a serious money range. Data centers can be built for less. I wonder if the down voters on the hardware comments actually run services at scale.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should have moved to bare metal months/years ago. Things like making your servers preemptible is like putting a bandaid on a gaping bullet hole.
There are many reasons why bare metal doesn't make much sense for us, at least at the moment. Here are couple: - we're very small team (13 people). We would never be able to manage this kind of infrastructure - we're growing incredibly fast. Just 6 months ago we were running on ~300 servers. We grew so quickly that we are now working with GCE's infrastructure planers to plan our resource needs - even we're not suffer…
One reason why I still can't use GCE in 2016. No PostgreSQL support for CloudSQL. I can find alternatives for other services, but I don't want to compromise on the choice of relational database. Note: I understand there are third-party providers for PostgreSQL, but I'd rather have Google's.
This is on my short wishlist for GCE. It's such obvious feature parity that it's very strange they're not doing it.