Where is the article getting these numbers from? Did they say and I missed it?
AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
131–140 of 252 posts
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#132"The charges don’t appear to be a case of cloud providers gouging their customers" I disagree on this one. The margins on egress are, well...egregious.
Not hard to see it as a twisted incentive to stay. The one time hit of moving could be too much to cram into tight budgets.
Even though it’s costlier in the long run, I have encountered a lot of management types that shy away from having a big spike pop up on their monthly spend.
Politics win over math every time. Gotta keep the boss mans feels normalized.
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#133AWS Azure or Google cloud data transfer: 9 cents per GB
Digital Ocean: 1 cent per GB
The really weird thing is this should be the absolute lead on all Digital Ocean marketing but they don't even mention it. It's their single biggest selling point.
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has no basis in reality. You can buy a 10Gbps transit circuit for $1500/month. That's $0.00046296296 per gigabyte.
That depends on how much saturation you can get. Most end users/companies can’t saturate this reliably, or have much spoiler traffic. Only the biggest players can minimise their seasonality enough to get close to this, and doing that is a service that it’s probably worth paying for.
> Only the biggest players can minimise their seasonality enough to get close to this
Okay, like AWS
> and doing that is a service that it’s probably worth paying for.
Okay, but how many orders of magnitude?
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is to make it easy to move data in and hard to move it out.
Someone should set up a big fat pipe right outside of Amazon data centers with free unlimited transfers, get data on behalf of customers copied to hard drives from AWS, and then attach those hard drives to the Uber pipe. I bet that service could work for a short & glorious moment in time.
[deleted]
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of them (AWS, GCP, Azure) are priced outrageously compared to high quality, well peered, bandwidth.
GCP is pretty good though. Cold-potato, very fat backbone, and very good presence at a ton of PoPs. When using GCP you basically have the same global, high-bandwidth direct connectivity presence that Google uses for its products, and that is very difficult to match by traditional T1 ISPs.
It does have advantages, but it's not always worth the difference of "several cents per GB" versus "fractions of a cent per GB".
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#137Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#138Earlier quoted context omitted.
GCP is pretty good though. Cold-potato, very fat backbone, and very good presence at a ton of PoPs. When using GCP you basically have the same global, high-bandwidth direct connectivity presence that Google uses for its products, and that is very difficult to match by traditional T1 ISPs.
It does have advantages, but it's not always worth the difference of "several cents per GB" versus "fractions of a cent per GB".
Walmart is generally cheaper than a steak restaurant. YMMV, and they both have their uses. Its worth going to both.
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#139Is there a plausible explanation why egress fees from cloud providers costs around $0.1/GB? "Traditional" server providers such as Hetzner are able to offer bandwidth at orders of magnitude lower price (eg. $1.1/TB). I understand that cloud providers may have better interconnects or better uptimes, but that doesn't justify the magnitudes higher pricing.
When your link is bargain basement C* "good luck" peering, it can be super cheap and honestly will likely get everything most users need.
When you care about packet level SLOs... yeah, you start to shop around.
Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data
#140I've actually been working on a library to help mitigate cloud storage lock-in. The idea is to treat cloud storage providers like disks are treated in RAID. For example, you have 3 separate cloud providers. Cloud providers 1 and 2 have every other byte of data striped across them. Cloud provider 3 has parity data. To pull a file you can only need 2 of the 3 cloud providers. If you don't like how a cloud storage provi…
> every other byte of data striped across
I assume you didn't mean that literally because I can't see how that will ever work out in terms of cpu cost. I think breaking it up into blocks like what RAID4/5/6 would be better but will still impact the performance of reads.
The performance of writes is going to be worse. Not because of the parity calculation but because you will be taking the max latency over all the cloud providers.
I can't see people trading off that much performance for better fault tolerance (in a world where S3 guarantees 11 nines) or ease of switching.