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

Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 371 posts

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#181

Post by azmodeus »

mk89 wrote: post #165
tedivm wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the AWS blog post they referenced- > DynamoDB powers multiple high-traffic Amazon properties and systems including Alexa, the Amazon.com sites, and all Amazon fulfillment centers. Over the course of Prime Day, these sources made trillions of calls to the DynamoDB API. DynamoDB maintained high availability while delivering single-digit millisecond responses and peaking at 126 million requests per second. Amazon w…

They very well know that people don't read sh* anymore. Just throw numbers there, PowerPoint them and offer an "unbiased" comparison where Google shines - buy Google. Worst case scenario, it's Google you're buying, not a random startup etc.

Google doesn't have a great brand of not killing products. No support and randomly killing stuff is not a good business relationship

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#182

Post by vicpara »

Just moved our infra from GCP to AWS. Kubernetes clusters, LB, storage, lambdas, KMS and all of it.

Google runs their tech stack as if it's a startup that builds their CV. Everything is immature, tons of hacks, undocumented features. If you are on their k8s there are tons of upcoming new versions and features that force you to revisit key hacks you put in your infra because of their misgivings. Our infra team keeps tinkering around our infra and it never ends. It's 50:50. 50% of time making sure we are prepared for their shit and 50 % our ambitious infra plans. Good luck with that.

With AWS our bill is 60% of what GCP used to be running 3 k8s clusters.

AWS support is so nice, you can't believe it.

Nah, I don't trust Google with anything. It's a scam. Google's support is horrendous. They refer you to idiots that drag you through calls until your will for life dies. And you're back to the mercy of some lost engineer that may comment on a github issue you opened 20 days ago. We have a bug reported back in 2020 that got closed recently without any action because it became stale and the API changed so much it doesn't really matter. It's that bad.

The billing day is a monthly reminder you're paying entitled devs to do subpar work other companies do a lot better.

No, we don't miss them already.

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#184

Post by iends »

ljm wrote: post #174
tedivm wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the AWS blog post they referenced- > DynamoDB powers multiple high-traffic Amazon properties and systems including Alexa, the Amazon.com sites, and all Amazon fulfillment centers. Over the course of Prime Day, these sources made trillions of calls to the DynamoDB API. DynamoDB maintained high availability while delivering single-digit millisecond responses and peaking at 126 million requests per second. Amazon w…

I used DynamoDB as part of the job a few years ago and never got single-millisecond responses - it was 20ms minimum and 70+ on a cold-start, but I can accept that optimising Dynamo's various indexes is a largely opaque process. We had to add on hacks like setting the request timeout to 5ms and keeping the cluster warm by submitting a no-op query every 500ms to keep it even remotely stable. We couldn't even use DAX be…

Been using DynamoDB for years and haven’t had to do any of the hacks you talk about doing. Not using ruby though. TCP keep-alive does help with perf though (which I think you might be suggesting.)

I don’t have p99 times in front of me right this second but it’s definitely lower than 20ms for reads and likely lower for writes. (EC2 in VPC).

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#185

Post by g9yuayon »

gregdoesit wrote: post #71

“ According to the Amazon Prime Day blog post, DynamoDB processes 126 million queries per second at peak. Spanner on the other hand processes 3 billion queries per second at peak, which is more than 20x higher, and has more than 12 exabytes of data under management.” This comparison seems to be not exactly fair? Amazon’s 126 million queries per second was purely for Amazon-related services serving Prime Day generatin…

> At Amazon, practically every service is built on top of AWS - a proper vote of confidence!

Not only this, but practically most, if not all, of the AWS services use DynamoDB, including use cases that are usually not for databases, such as multi-tenant job queues (just search "Database as a Queue" to get the sentiment). In fact, it is really really hard to use any relational DB in AWS. I mean, a team would have to go through a CEO approval to get exceptions, which says a lot about the robustness of DDB.

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#186

Post by nvm0n2 »

nameless912 wrote: post #56
teaearlgraycold wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Postgres is the database God himself would have made.

Like, I don't want to fanboy, but it's _hard_ to find a use case that postgres can't handle at small to medium (i.e. 90% of projects) scale.

Uh let's not get carried away. It's fine with enough work maybe. But Postgres has a lot of awkwardness too. HA is a pain, major version upgrades are a pain, JS or JVM stored procs are a pain, configuring auth is a pain. There is a reason so many people are desperate to pay someone else to run Postgres for them instead of just renting a few VMs and doing it themselves.

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#187

Post by g9yuayon »

vicpara wrote: post #182

Just moved our infra from GCP to AWS. Kubernetes clusters, LB, storage, lambdas, KMS and all of it. Google runs their tech stack as if it's a startup that builds their CV. Everything is immature, tons of hacks, undocumented features. If you are on their k8s there are tons of upcoming new versions and features that force you to revisit key hacks you put in your infra because of their misgivings. Our infra team keeps t…

> AWS support is so nice, you can't believe it.

This reminds me of the fond days of having weekly customers calls. We develop AWS services, and we answer our customer-support calls directly. No middle man. Just techies to techies. And we made promises to customers on the fly, and customers sometimes project managed us.

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#188

Post by hooverd »

nameless912 wrote: post #108
hooverd wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

/shill The AWS SAM CLI smooths over a lot of Lambda's rough points. /unshill

Gasp, a shill?? I totally believe you, I just can't see how it becomes easier than chucking a container on Fargate or something. Maybe I've just been scarred by lambda rat's nests in the past.

Yeah, the "proper" way to do Lambdas, shown in so many fancy architecture diagrams, is a rat's nest. I don't like APIs on Lambda unless you can shove them into one container with a catchall proxy on API Gateway. They really shine if you're processing SQS messages or EventBridge events. If you aren't using other AWS services and aren't cost engineering, then Lambdas probably aren't worth the headache.

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#189

Post by chickenpotpie »

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #183

Meh. Why am I going to sign up for a service that is surely to be canceled on a Google Whim™?

Spanner is probably the least likely thing to ever get cancelled at google by a long shot. It powers basically every single product at google and has been around for many years. I can't think of another Google product that has been around for so long and used internally and externally so heavily besides Gmail (which uses spanner).

Re: Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB

#190

Post by hooverd »

cdelsolar wrote: post #161
sakopov wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your mileage may vary, but I think in majority of the cases Fargate is going to be significantly more expensive than Lambda.

I don't think that's actually true on a GB-second basis (memory * CPU)?

The cost efficiency of Lambda vs Fargate/EC2 ECS/one of the dozen other ways to run containers on AWS plummets as your RPS goes up.
Post reply on HN