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

141–150 of 176 posts

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#141

Post by marcosdumay »

laumars wrote: post #71
revelation wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be real on high availability. If you are honest with yourself, on the cloud that doesn't mean 2.. AWS regions but 2.. cloud providers. It's a yearly occurrence now that 90% of SaaS stop working because AWS is broken, and it's not any of the actually redudant parts like power supplies that are broken, but because a human pushed software or configuration and the whole thing came crashing down.

Idealistically I agree with you but pragmatically I think more than 1 cloud providers isn't really worth the effort. It's not often that a whole region goes down but even then I can't recall when the whole cloud platform last became inaccessible - usually it's just a region. But once again it comes back to SLIs and client expectations.

But then, "more than 1 cloud providers isn't really worth the effort" and "2 bare metal instances isn't HA. Not even close." are really incoherent.

Two machines with two internet connections and a good UPS easily match the availability of AWS.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#142

Post by vgt »

manigandham wrote: post #52
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…

Interestingly this is where Google does great with fast VMs and disks along with sustained use discounts. Add in the committed use discounts and you get very close to dedicated server pricing, while getting all the flexibility and resilience of their cloud platform. Sadly their support quality has decreased and our own account team has ignored us for weeks so maybe stick with AWS instead.

Hey there, work at Google. Please feel free to ping me with your concerns. That's certainly not the experience we strive for.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#143

Post by [deleted] »

ivanhoe wrote: post #132
sly010 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With cloud you can provision what you think you'll need for a few weeks and then, once you get actual usage data, you can scale and fine-tune the setup to fully utilize it (and optimize the costs). Or in a more realistic scenario you forget to dial back an are paying $200/month extra for unused provisioned IO for years before anyone notices it. Happened, even though I was looking for improvements after every bill.

True, but did you ever scale down an already setup & running dedicated machine? With dedicated hardware it's always like "if it works don't touch, and we might need it one day anyway" :)

[deleted]

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#144

Post by evook »

qaq wrote: post #135
eropple wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I'm not trying to big-time you, but I have experience across a wide range of environments and shop sizes (both in clouds and, unfortunately, people who bought the "VPSes are fine too" idea in like 2015) and, after being in these trenches for a while, "it doesn't improve developer productivity" reads more to me as "we don't know how to leverage AWS for developer productivity." Elasticity is nice; pervasive automati…

That reads more like AWS marketing copy :) At scale you have to architect around AWS crapy network. 0 network transparency abismal IOPS performance very limited config. options Horrible uptime (US East has worth uptime as a region than wast majority of quality DCs) 0 Access to people who can really help you (unless you are at several mil. per month spend)

You forgot to mention the choice between bad peering vs a high jitter direct connect. Two vlans on the same cable doesn't equal redundancy, two cables along the same geographical site neither.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#145

Post by forgot-my-pw »

empath75 wrote: post #84
sideproject wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been running a web application for the past 6 months and it just crossed 150,000 page views/month mark. Sure, for others it's not that great, but for me, this is the project that is showing the biggest potential. Anyway, the funny thing is, I'm running it on $2.50/month Vultr VPS. I got so worried when it crossed 30,000 that my site will crash. But it didn't. Then when its views got higher, I optimized further.…

150,000 views a month is like a hit every two seconds. That's nothing. Talk to me when you're managing 150000 hits a second. Edit: sorry didn't mean to imply that your site isn't successful, only that in terms of traffic, it doesn't make aws worth it.

Guess most of us should never talk to you. Oh well, nothing of value was lost.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#146

Post by [deleted] »

AYBABTME wrote: post #103
sideproject wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been running a web application for the past 6 months and it just crossed 150,000 page views/month mark. Sure, for others it's not that great, but for me, this is the project that is showing the biggest potential. Anyway, the funny thing is, I'm running it on $2.50/month Vultr VPS. I got so worried when it crossed 30,000 that my site will crash. But it didn't. Then when its views got higher, I optimized further.…

Not sure what your website is doing, but here's a quick thought exercise: If you serve a page in 10s, then you can serve 259'200 pages/month. render_time page_view/month 10s 259'200 9s 288,000 8s 324,000 7s 370,285 6s 432,000 5s 518,400 4s 648,000 3s 864,000 2s 1,296,000 1s 2,592,000 So like, think 1 million views per month with 2s render time. This is obviously skipping over a ton of details, but it's a good rule of…

[deleted]

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#147

Post by neuronexmachina »

geofft wrote: post #107
empath75 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

150,000 views a month is like a hit every two seconds. That's nothing. Talk to me when you're managing 150000 hits a second. Edit: sorry didn't mean to imply that your site isn't successful, only that in terms of traffic, it doesn't make aws worth it.

How many projects actually get 150,000 hits a second? (And are they not better served by buying and operating their own datacenters?)

How many hits/second does a project have to serve when they're on the front page of HN?

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#148

Post by chucky_z »

A 1TB gp2 volume is cheaper than an 1TB, 3000 iops io2 volume, and provides nearly-identical characters.

Only use io2 if you have a latency sensitive application or need more than 10,000 iops. Even then you can RAID10 some gp2 volumes together and with enhanced networking get I believe 30k iops out of one instance.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#149

Post by jdc0589 »

nvivo wrote: post #72
BurritoAlPastor wrote: post #12

The author's takeaways include moving disks to io1. This is a bad bargain in most cases, and particularly bad in the ~500 IOPS range (which is what I'm seeing in the Grafana screenshot there). gp2 disks get 3 iops per gig "free", bursting up to 3k. (They don't burst after 1 tb, because your baseline performance is higher than the burst rate.) io1 is 25% more expensive per-gb, and you pay by the IOPS on top of that. A…

Agreed. After a lot of struggles trying to find a good average IOPS on AWS for our database, we just increased disk to 1tb with gp2 and got rid of the problem. It gets 3000 iops/sec all the time and you never have these problems. It's still much cheaper than io1. It's a trade you must account for when choosing cloud providers, nothing is free. For now it's still cheaper to pay for servers than spend time setting thin…

> we just increased disk to 1tb with gp2 and got rid of the problem. It gets 3000 iops/sec all the time and you never have these problems. It's still much cheaper than io1.

shockingly, tons of people don't know about this. Sure, there are use cases where it probably isn't cost effective to do this, but my default policy towards using gp2 is "will this server write to disk even a moderate amount? if so, its get a 1TB volume." Especially for something like a node in a k8s cluster where your workload is non-deterministic, this should be the default.

Re: Docker operations slowing down on AWS

#150

Post by ericd »

neuronexmachina wrote: post #147
geofft wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many projects actually get 150,000 hits a second? (And are they not better served by buying and operating their own datacenters?)

How many hits/second does a project have to serve when they're on the front page of HN?

I don't remember exactly, but not that many, maybe a couple thousand concurrent users. My brother's webapp has hit the front page of Reddit a few times, but a single dedicated machine was more than enough to handle that.
Post reply on HN