This is my favorite news so far. Hard to imagine beating this one, in terms of actual impact for me.
Very tired of this: `Duration: 58.62 ms Billed Duration: 100 ms`
Very happy about this: `Duration: 48.74 ms Billed Duration: 49 ms`
AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
71–80 of 291 posts
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's nice to see that AWS is using their economy of scale to reduce their own costs, and passing that on to the consumer.
I don't think they are doing it to be nice to consumers. I think they are doing it to cost less than competitors.
Are you implying that they are trying to make money?
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#73There will be more surprise in bills, imagine if your Lambda is making a call to an API and this API suddenly slow down for any reason
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think they are doing it to be nice to consumers. I think they are doing it to cost less than competitors.
Isn't that the same in practice? You get customers by being nice to them. Being nice to customers means competitive pricing, high quality support, good documentation, easy integration, etc. It's all driving towards the same goal.
It's not necessarily the same in outcome. Undercutting competitors can be a temporary thing. As soon as the competitors are eliminated you jack the prices up. Doing it to be nice to customers can potentially last even after competitors go belly up. Then again, Google's motto used to be "do no evil" (basically be nice to customers). That obviously went the way of the dodo bird.
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not necessarily. For low frequency workloads with reasonably long step times, Lambda can still make sense. (E.g. When videos appear in this S3 bucket, process them.) You might only drop videos in once a week, but when you do you want to run some code against them. There are plenty of distributed workflow reasons to run long running Lambdas infrequently rather than spinning up and down an EC2 instance.
Lambdas are underpowered and often poor choices for compute-heavy workloads. Unless there's an urgency to processing infrequent videos, it might make more sense to backlog messages to the queue and use spot instances for draining the queue and processing videos, especially from a cost perspective. Though I acknowledge that this is a more complex setup.
I haven’t heard that lambdas are “underpowered” before, but I’m interested to learn more. Could you elaborate just a bit on why they are underpowered?
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lambda isn't designed for long running processes. Keeping the runtime limit lower makes it a lot easier to operate the underlying metal because you can move thing around every N minutes where N is the runtime limit. For long-running processes, something like Fargate might be a better fit in the AWS side of things.
Fargate works well especially after they fixed some of the pricing issues there. Then next step you can spin up a fleet of EC2 or EKS or something
> Fargate works well especially after they fixed some of the pricing issues there.
Was this recent, should I take a look at this again? My issue with Fargate as recent as a year ago was that running the same workload on ECS (if you can use your cluster nodes efficiently) was twice as cheap (even without reserved instances).
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a process takes that long, lambda would be a poor architectural choice.
I used an extreme to show the point. At 800 ms the savings are also less than closer to 0.
Yes, but even then it's still a saving, however small, not a loss, so I feel to see this point of this.
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#78There will be more surprise in bills, imagine if your Lambda is making a call to an API and this API suddenly slow down for any reason
How does this change increase the likelihood of that happening?
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#79I've learned that AWS pricing tends to improve over time, and I appreciate it. I just recently switched from a startup offering authorization to AWS Cognito because the startup kept raising their price(s). It's nice to see this drop, though I'm sure Amazon does it due to competition as well.
It's nice to see that AWS is using their economy of scale to reduce their own costs, and passing that on to the consumer.
It’s more that computing gets cheaper over time because of advancements in cpu performance and lowering of storage costs.
AWS doesn’t really ever have a reason to raise costs, it doesn’t have to lowball costs to attract customers in the first place.
Re: AWS Lambda pricing now per ms
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
How long would you like it to be? Chris Munns - Lead of Dev Advocacy for Serverless@AWS
My lambdas run indefinitely. It's a bit silly, but basically every lambda spins up a bunch of threads, pulls messages, and then pushes them into internal buffers to be processed. There are reasons for this. What I care about is: * Scale to 0, and automatic scaling up without configuring it * Automatic patching of the OS * Fault isolation Lambda gives me that. So each one runs for 15 minutes, processing all data in an…
Today, for a nonstop workload you might save money with Fargate or ECS.