Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Docker operations slowing down on AWS

jeremyeder.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 176 posts

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#91

Post by vidarh »

inopinatus wrote: post #88
vidarh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do contract devops for both physical servers (that includes me occasionally travelling to a data center), managed servers in a full service colo, and AWS, and the overall cost per server consistently ends up higher including all devops time for the AWS instance in my experience. I love it when customers pick AWS (though I usually advice not to, unless they have very specific needs), as my billable hours are way hig…

All our duelling anecdotes aside, you've picked out the one category I would most definitely not host on AWS: high constant outbound traffic sites. "Don't build your CDN on AWS", I can agree about that. Using public clouds for the spiky part of an otherwise predictable steady-state workload is also a great strategy. Also this: > Their biggest benefit is to defer the initial setup of a self-managed cluster And that, I…

I tend to favour starting with rented servers too, rather than purchases (or leases, rather) - whether that's on AWS, or rented by the month then becomes a much simpler comparison.

As for the CDN, we absolutely agree. I noted elsewhere that even if you host on AWS, if you have any kind of volume of outbound bandwidth use, you should probably get a CDN elsewhere whether or not you think you need a CDN. A good caching CDN can for many people cut their AWS bill dramatically without making you move anything else off AWS.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#92

Post by krallja »

shusson wrote: post #4

tldr: AWS EC2 has the concept of I/O credits for storage. If your instance runs out of credits, bad things, which may seem completely unrelated, will happen. I was having similar issues last week and did not consider I/O credits. I think AWS could do better at notifying you if your EC2 instance gets into this state (without having to set up a cloud watch alarm).

> I think AWS could do better at notifying you if your EC2 instance gets into this state (without having to set up a cloud watch alarm).

How would you configure these notifications? Who do they get sent to? How often? Do they escalate to someone else? When?

Once you answer these questions, you have come up with ... CloudWatch.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#93

Post by bacheson1293 »

anonacct37 wrote: post #16
chx wrote: post #10

And then people consider me a dinosaur when I say, no cloud, just rent a server or two (not colo! just dedicated servers). Your average web service does not need to scale near infinitely; for the same amount of money you pay to Amazon you can overprovision 3-5-10 times and that'll handle your spikes. No surprises. Same amount of work: EC2 and bare metal both gives you a root prompt, go from there. These days you can…

Yes. Look at https://www.packet.net/bare-metal/ for bare metal boxes provisioned in less time than an ec2 instance. Or if you want to go old school, cheaper, and less sexy/api driven: https://www.delimiter.com/ If you shop, for around 30-40 a month you can get 16 cores, 32gb ram, and a 120GB ssd or 1-2TB spinny disk.

I migrated to packet all bright eye'd and full of wonder...terrible mistake...outages on a weekly basis and they have no availability zones so when outage occurs the entire region is down. Replicating across regions failed our latency requirements so that was a no-go.

I can't stress this enough. Having to roll your own / administrate a logging system, Database, load balancers, autoscale, file storage far exceeds the added cost of the cloud. Now that GCE has sustained usage discounts of 39% it makes no sense to go bare metal right now.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#94

Post by quicksilver03 »

Corrado wrote: post #49
Roritharr wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with renting boxes is the hidden costs if you want to do it right. First of all, if you have anything mission critical, you need to run it in a high availability config, this is easy for stateless microservices, but when it comes to running your DB, you start renting three boxes instead of one or two and configuring them accordingly. And then you setup your Backup Infrastructure for disaster recovery, Gla…

I completely agree with your line of reasoning and I have a few more thoughts on the matter. There are a ton of "soft" problems that arise when building out your stack. Licensing, warranties, and maintenance issues are things that never come up with a cloud provider. Then there are physical problems with building your own cabinet like cabling and power & heat management. The list just grows and grows. Another big thi…

There are several options between "full cloud" and "building my own datacenter": for example, you can rent dedicated servers by the month, where you get all of the hardware power and you don't have to commit money upfront.

The 2 extremes you cite might be good for some people in a narrow set of contexts, it makes sense to include other possibilities when evaluating your hosting options.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#96

Post by anon1253 »

chx wrote: post #10

And then people consider me a dinosaur when I say, no cloud, just rent a server or two (not colo! just dedicated servers). Your average web service does not need to scale near infinitely; for the same amount of money you pay to Amazon you can overprovision 3-5-10 times and that'll handle your spikes. No surprises. Same amount of work: EC2 and bare metal both gives you a root prompt, go from there. These days you can…

Well, I agree wholeheartedly https://joelkuiper.eu/cloud

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#97

Post by tambourine_man »

chx wrote: post #10

And then people consider me a dinosaur when I say, no cloud, just rent a server or two (not colo! just dedicated servers). Your average web service does not need to scale near infinitely; for the same amount of money you pay to Amazon you can overprovision 3-5-10 times and that'll handle your spikes. No surprises. Same amount of work: EC2 and bare metal both gives you a root prompt, go from there. These days you can…

My love for AWS is their availability zones.

You can be anywhere in the world and have ridiculously small latency.

But the cost you pay sure is high.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#98

Post by Diederich »

chrisan wrote: post #89
jopsen wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

also scaleway.com (they have API, but no user-data). IMO, docker and container orchestration spells a bright future for bare-metal boxes like these, as you won't need cloudformation, etc.. But I still see few alternatives to S3, many vendors offers block devices, but only the big clouds offer blob storage. Backup and restore from blob storage makes recovery from crash pretty easy.

How does docker replace cloudformation? Don't you still need something that says "hey you are running out of capacity soon, time to add more hardware for your software to run on" There has to be something that adds more bare-metal for your docker containers to run on when the existing bare-metal reaches capacity, right?

A fully containerized setup allows one to use something like Kubernetes to do such orchestration.

K8s is getting pretty easy to setup these days.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#99

Post by frubar »

vidarh wrote: post #76
inopinatus wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I followed this advice, it would hurt my startup badly. We would be investing far more time into system operations than I do now thanks to AWS's automation of standard stuff. My hosting bill would increase - partly because we can run on t2.micro instances, but that awfully glib advice about overprovisioning is most definitely asking for trouble; and we'd lose curated services like RDS and OpsWorks - which, by the…

I do contract devops for both physical servers (that includes me occasionally travelling to a data center), managed servers in a full service colo, and AWS, and the overall cost per server consistently ends up higher including all devops time for the AWS instance in my experience. I love it when customers pick AWS (though I usually advice not to, unless they have very specific needs), as my billable hours are way hig…

For the life of me, I can't figure out why hackernews is still always talking about AWS. Every single time I've tried to look at it for a use case of mine it's the most expensive possible option. Cloud? Sure, I see the benefit and plan to go on the cloud (probably Azure, IBM or so). AWS? I don't get it.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#100

Post by mysterydip »

empath75 wrote: post #90
jazoom wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the point of your comment. The parent was simply explaining why they don't need extreme scalability with their scenario. No one is under the impression that multiplying their traffic by 75000 (so you work at Google then?) will not require a big server upgrade.

He's making a judgement on the value of aws using a use case that makes no sense to use aws, anyway. He could be doing something similar with lightsail on aws at similar cost if he really wanted to, though.

I thought that was the point chx was making, with sideproject giving an example. How many people really do 150,000 hits a second versus how many are using AWS?
Post reply on HN