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

AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

theinformation.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 252 posts

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#201

Post by achiang »

gcommer wrote: post #158
codexon wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cold potato is not necessarily better, actually its often times worse than hot potato and usually used to lower costs so you don't have to pay other people for transit. For example, a cold potato network may have a link from Dallas to Chicago to New York, while a hot potato network could have a direct link from Dallas to New York. Cogent uses cold potato and is frequently worse than other transit providers.

Google's cold potato is very good though. (Also, they offer the option to use hot potato and pay them less: https://cloud.google.com/network-tiers/docs/overview )

Thanks, you made my day.

I'm a Google network SRE, but perhaps I'll get new business cards saying "cold potato engineer".

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#202

Post by mc3 »

jrockway wrote: post #15
Polyisoprene wrote: post #12

Cheap shovels and expensive ladders.

Amazon has gone one step past that and made the shovels expensive too. The fear of buying a computer has made them billions.

Fear of buying a computer? Or awesomeness of instantly having a computer appear from the ether when you need it?

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#203

Post by dodobirdlord »

chatmasta wrote: post #163
merb wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

actually there is a eu mirror for the gcp registry eu.gcr.io

That seems like the kind of thing that should be configured by default on servers in the EU.

It's not really clear to me what that would mean. Auto-replicating customer data like docker images across national borders is a non-starter for legal compliance reasons. That's got to be an opt-in, not an opt-out. So they can't just point outbound GCR requests at the EU registry and assume the customer's images are there.

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#204

Post by rhizome »

Cloud providers can launch and advertise and advocate every little product they're able to refactor out of the prevailing development and systems engineering practices, but transit remains expensive, and basically consistently so. Not only that, but AWS transit is like 20x the price of boring old hosting providers, providers who don't also charge for egress.

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#205

Post by heavyset_go »

pepemon wrote: post #92
chickenpotpie wrote: post #60

I'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…

Sounds exactly what is Tahoe-LAFS for.

Currently use this across cloud providers.

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#206

Post by _16k4 »

prolificd wrote: post #20

It does appear like price gouging. Once you're in, you're locked in. Any chance some of those high costs are due to movement of data due to GDPR compliance? Maybe Apple did all its prep in 2017. Also there are some misconceptions on inter-AZ data transfer as well: ( https://www.lastweekinaws.com/blog/aws-cross-az-data-transfe... )

I assure you there is nothing sinister about the price asymmetry. Fiber and routers have as much bandwidth coming as going. The inbound traffic is mostly composed of little http(s) requests. The outbound is full of images and mountains of JavaScript. Cloud providers don't charge for ingress because they got it for free when they grew their egress capability to meet demand.

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#207

Post by ec109685 »

_16k4 wrote: post #206
prolificd wrote: post #20

It does appear like price gouging. Once you're in, you're locked in. Any chance some of those high costs are due to movement of data due to GDPR compliance? Maybe Apple did all its prep in 2017. Also there are some misconceptions on inter-AZ data transfer as well: ( https://www.lastweekinaws.com/blog/aws-cross-az-data-transfe... )

I assure you there is nothing sinister about the price asymmetry. Fiber and routers have as much bandwidth coming as going. The inbound traffic is mostly composed of little http(s) requests. The outbound is full of images and mountains of JavaScript. Cloud providers don't charge for ingress because they got it for free when they grew their egress capability to meet demand.

When was the last time AWS reduced egress rates?

And they could negotiate the best rates on the planet given their scale.

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#209

Post by chillfox »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #197

does anyone know of a cheap service to order large amounts of data by mail on physical media? I am often interested in some dataset for which I can afford the storage in the form of a hard drive but not in the form of a download through my home connection. If a service existed that simply offered the following: * customer provides URL (and optionally hash checksum) * customer pays, and later receives hard disk drive…

I don't think it would be a cheap service if you set a modest goal of earning a cinema trip with popcorn and a drink for every trip to the post office.

1TB HDD: 59 AUD International Shipping (assuming we can keep it under 1kg with packaging): 38 AUD

That is 97 AUD before considering any profit you might want to make (35 AUD for the movie + small popcorn and drink), fixed setup costs like a NAS to cache data sets or the bandwidth costs.

Re: AWS Customers Rack Up Hefty Bills for Moving Data

#210

Post by riking »

ec109685 wrote: post #207
_16k4 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assure you there is nothing sinister about the price asymmetry. Fiber and routers have as much bandwidth coming as going. The inbound traffic is mostly composed of little http(s) requests. The outbound is full of images and mountains of JavaScript. Cloud providers don't charge for ingress because they got it for free when they grew their egress capability to meet demand.

When was the last time AWS reduced egress rates? And they could negotiate the best rates on the planet given their scale.

I get the impression cloud providers don't "negotiate rates" but rather "build infrastructure" most of the time.
Post reply on HN