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

Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

lugassy.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 73 posts

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#31

Post by euph0ria »

We were also impressed with DO's GUI and easy of use. We setup a few monitor servers on their network to measure uptime, latency, packet loss and similar metrics since we deal with audio streaming over UDP. Suffice it to say, it was a mess. So many micro-timeouts and tons of packet loss in small bursts.

For prototypes and small projects dealing mainly in TCP and if uptime is not really important then DO is great. For us, we stick to AWS / GCP for the bulk of our load including dev/testing etc as we want to have the environment as similar to prod as possible.

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#32

Post by tzury »

kuschku wrote: post #29
tzury wrote: post #27

“Goodbye cloud, hello nice UI for VPS hosting”. If Google’s own premium speedy network, anycast IP, global load balancing and security features bring no benefit to your web operations, then your math might be right. If you need your LB to handle 10s of millions of HTTP/S requests per minute, then what other choices do you have other than Google? F/W default “Everything within a project should allowed”? Sorry, but no…

> If you need your LB to handle 10s of millions of HTTP/S requests per minute, then what other choices do you have other than Google? The same options every business that needed them has done for decades? Renting dedicated servers én masse, colocating, or running own datacenters? And doing this in multiple countries? What I'd suggest for a start is renting dedicated servers or colocating in a few places (EU-Central,…

Dedicated servers == constanct cost. Many cases, you reach peak times for several hours per week/day. With GCP scale up and super fast, and when done, tearing down and saving money.

Also, from my experience, when you reach a certain level of operations, you discuss with Google sales team and you get a significant discount for bandwidth.

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#33

Post by mluggy »

kuschku wrote: post #29
tzury wrote: post #27

“Goodbye cloud, hello nice UI for VPS hosting”. If Google’s own premium speedy network, anycast IP, global load balancing and security features bring no benefit to your web operations, then your math might be right. If you need your LB to handle 10s of millions of HTTP/S requests per minute, then what other choices do you have other than Google? F/W default “Everything within a project should allowed”? Sorry, but no…

> If you need your LB to handle 10s of millions of HTTP/S requests per minute, then what other choices do you have other than Google? The same options every business that needed them has done for decades? Renting dedicated servers én masse, colocating, or running own datacenters? And doing this in multiple countries? What I'd suggest for a start is renting dedicated servers or colocating in a few places (EU-Central,…

i assume ovh and hetzner? care to share more of your experience with them?

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#34

Post by doh »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #30
doh wrote: post #19

I think this is called maturity. GCP finally knows who the target customer is, and they're building features for them. DO has really nice and simple UI, but try to spin 5,000 servers and you will see what a hot mess it is. GCP shines at a very large scale. For us, what makes the difference, is the spending predictability and massive discounts coming from running preemptible servers or simply committing to certain usa…

+1 you said what I was going to say. GCP probably doesn’t want the business of small web sites and portals. I think that under Diane Green they have a clear vision of who their target (large/huge) customer base should be and what they need to do to attract those customers. For small projects, especially when I am paying the bills, it is difficult to beat OVH and DigitalOcean on costs. That said, GCP is still my favor…

I hear you. Miss most of the tools and infrastructure every day since I left. I was ecstatic when they made PubSub available to everyone. Wish they would expose more of the internal services, especially Colossus, Dremel, Borg, ...

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#35

Post by kuschku »

mluggy wrote: post #33
kuschku wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you need your LB to handle 10s of millions of HTTP/S requests per minute, then what other choices do you have other than Google? The same options every business that needed them has done for decades? Renting dedicated servers én masse, colocating, or running own datacenters? And doing this in multiple countries? What I'd suggest for a start is renting dedicated servers or colocating in a few places (EU-Central,…

i assume ovh and hetzner? care to share more of your experience with them?

I've used Online (the company that also ownes scaleway, but their business line), Hetzner and OVH before.

Hetzner and OVH have much better peering than online (ofc still worse than GCP), especially noticeable when users are in Asia Pacific and you have only servers in the west.

Online is significantly cheaper, but well, the peering issue.

Generally I prefer Hetzner for compute-heavy workloads (especially their ML server offer with an i7-6700 and GTX1080 for 99€ is awesome) or networking, for most of the rest, I'd just go with Online.

Important for me is that I can just rent a handful servers, try out building something, fail, and try again, always knowing that it won't cost the world, and allowing me to experiment. If it fails, I can just try something else, if it works, I can just scale up. Doesn't have to be perfect, just has to be enough to let me fail early and often.

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#36

Post by sokoloff »

tzury wrote: post #32
kuschku wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you need your LB to handle 10s of millions of HTTP/S requests per minute, then what other choices do you have other than Google? The same options every business that needed them has done for decades? Renting dedicated servers én masse, colocating, or running own datacenters? And doing this in multiple countries? What I'd suggest for a start is renting dedicated servers or colocating in a few places (EU-Central,…

Dedicated servers == constanct cost. Many cases, you reach peak times for several hours per week/day. With GCP scale up and super fast, and when done, tearing down and saving money. Also, from my experience, when you reach a certain level of operations, you discuss with Google sales team and you get a significant discount for bandwidth.

We're well past that point (with AWS) and we get a meaningful discount, but it's in no way competitive on a per-TB or per-Gbps basis with a dedicated colo.

It's also higher quality of service IMO. When AWS gets their daily DDoS traffic, they manage it and we never notice nor care. With smaller colo providers, they are much cheaper, but if your neighbor is getting DDoS'd, you notice it. I assume Azure and GCP are similar.

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#37

Post by sitepodmatt »

FBISurveillance wrote: post #17
FBISurveillance wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, not professionally, I like GCP more. Feedback cycle is (used to be) faster and it feels (used to feel) less enterprisey. I also liked the idea of a new player on the market, and wanted to make sure I vote for this diversity with dollars. I think these days GCP and AWS are more or less on par. One thing I learned the hard way: invest time into calculating your expected cloud spend. Your use case, partners…

Also, some GCP folks are hanging out here and it's nice to have some insights into platform internals.

Yep, pretty regularly I see "Disclaimer: I work for Google Cloud" on HN, with AWS and Azure I see a lot less, no solid metrics here. I also like I can get staff on a Google Groups for many of their products like StackDriver to share feedback and get a PM to respond eventually.

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#38

Post by kuschku »

sokoloff wrote: post #36
tzury wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dedicated servers == constanct cost. Many cases, you reach peak times for several hours per week/day. With GCP scale up and super fast, and when done, tearing down and saving money. Also, from my experience, when you reach a certain level of operations, you discuss with Google sales team and you get a significant discount for bandwidth.

We're well past that point (with AWS) and we get a meaningful discount, but it's in no way competitive on a per-TB or per-Gbps basis with a dedicated colo. It's also higher quality of service IMO. When AWS gets their daily DDoS traffic, they manage it and we never notice nor care. With smaller colo providers, they are much cheaper, but if your neighbor is getting DDoS'd, you notice it. I assume Azure and GCP are simi…

With regards to DDoS: that's something where OVH has surprised me well in the past, I've been a target once or twice, but they automatically handled all the upstream issues, and thanks to their hardware firewalls, I could filter the traffic before it hit my server.

On Twitter, the OVH CEO claimed that they've previously had servers targeted with 1.1Tbps DDoS, and still managed to keep that user's site working.

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#39

Post by radarsat1 »

Huh. I have zero experience with using cloud services, but I'm a bit surprised by the complexity of both of those UIs. I always assumed it was way simpler than that. Like, I thought it was as simple as using a command-line tool, like "docker run " but "cloud run.." As there any cloud services like that? Where you just specify your environment and CPU features you need etc from a single console command?

Re: Goodbye Google Cloud, Hello Digital Ocean

#40

Post by ericnyamu »

FBISurveillance wrote: post #9
throwawayReply wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you do that serves 1.2mm requests / second? I don't disbelieve you, I'm just wondering what type of site that is since English Wikipedia is several orders of magnitude lower than that.

Ads, one of the most shitshow industries in the world.

1.2m request per sec of ads looks like adblock isnt working .
Post reply on HN