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

Serverless Horrors

serverlesshorrors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 174 posts

Re: Serverless Horrors

#31

Post by tutfbhuf »

albert180 wrote: post #30
tutfbhuf wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but according to the article, he received the 100k bill because of peak traffic of 60TB of bandwidth per day over several days. If you have a dedicated server in a colo, then a 10GbE connection is very common these days. With a 10GbE connection, you can serve 100TB of traffic in a single day. Hence, if the colo had the same prices as Netlify for traffic, then a single server with a 10GbE connection would be suf…

No Colo charges the same insane prices for Traffic as Cloud Providers. Hetzner charges 1€/TB over 20TB for their 10GbE Servers

Yup, this is exactly my point. It's not the serverless architecture, something you set up on Hetzner yourself with OpenFaaS (https://github.com/openfaas/faas), that is to blame here but the insane pricing scheme for traffic.

Re: Serverless Horrors

#32

Post by hurflmurfl »

andrasbacsai wrote: post #12
000ooo000 wrote: post #9

Something feels a bit off about the creator of this site also pushing a competitor. On one hand, they're upfront about it, and on the other.. they're upfront about it. At least it might prompt the companies in question to be a bit less scummy.

Which competitor do I push exactly? :) (I created serverlesshorrors)

The link to the "competitor" is front and center on the site, so I imagine what you're really trying to say is that this is NOT a competitor for the following reasons: .

Otherwise this seems like a bait question:)

Re: Serverless Horrors

#34

Post by happymellon »

usr1106 wrote: post #7

How is no spending limit a serverless problem? It's a cloud problem. Edit: Well, if you have small cloud servers they might go down under an attack. And if you pay only outgoing like in AWS that's good for you.

It's not a cloud problem. The cloud is just somebody else's computer.

It's either a billing or an architecture problem.

Either let me throttle requests to prevent overbilling, or cut me off when I hit a certain value.

Re: Serverless Horrors

#36

Post by Hamuko »

usr1106 wrote: post #7

How is no spending limit a serverless problem? It's a cloud problem. Edit: Well, if you have small cloud servers they might go down under an attack. And if you pay only outgoing like in AWS that's good for you.

Because serverless 1) uses pay-as-you-go more often than traditional models 2) scales better to achieve massive usage.

If you DDoS my $5/month DigitalOcean VPS, it's not going to increase how much I have to pay DigitalOcean in terms of compute, and most likely the VPS will buckle under load before it can actually rack up massive transfer costs (since those are also pay-as-you-go for DO).

Re: Serverless Horrors

#37

Post by d1sxeyes »

hurflmurfl wrote: post #32
andrasbacsai wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which competitor do I push exactly? :) (I created serverlesshorrors)

The link to the "competitor" is front and center on the site, so I imagine what you're really trying to say is that this is NOT a competitor for the following reasons: . Otherwise this seems like a bait question:)

Andras (who created both Serverless Horrors and Coolify, which I imagine you're describing as the competitor here) is a pretty solid guy from everything I've seen and I've never seen him ask bait questions or engage in bad faith in discussions here or on other platforms.

Although he calls Coolify a Netlify 'alternative', it's 100% 'bring-your-own-server', and is not at all serverless. Coolify is basically a (very nice and featureful) fancy frontend to Docker with integration with Git.

Coolify is free if you want to install it yourself and don't mind the (minimal) tinkering needed to get it set up and keep it up-to-date, although you can pay a monthly fee to have your own servers managed for you, the main benefits are either to support continued development, or to access priority support. You still need to bring your own server, even if you're paying the management fee.

It's not a competitor to Netlify, it's an alternative.

Re: Serverless Horrors

#38

Post by bArray »

> The ddos attack was focused on a file on my site. Yes it’s partly my fault to put a 3.44MB size sound file on my site rather than using a third-party platform like SoundCloud. But still this doesn’t invalidate the point of having protection against such attacks, and limit the spending.

This is extremely sad. It's like we are taking steps backward. A 3.44MB should not be an issue and if it is, the answer should not be to host it elsewhere. If there is no other lesson learned here, it's that there is no such thing as 'free'. As others have said, there should be more done to prevent such large losses without some kind of limit.

I would also like to point out that VPS's are extremely cheap [1] and extremely easy to manage. They have automatic limits.

[1] https://lowendbox.com/blog/1-vps-1-usd-vps-per-month/

Re: Serverless Horrors

#39

Post by throwawayyy9237 »

Perhaps I'm overreacting, but I had my personal site on Netlify and decided to move it. I don't need anything more than a dumping ground for HTML, and Netlify was "good enough" (I wasn't aware that this issue existed)

What brought it closer to home was the characteristics of the recently affect site (same number of daily visits, not popular (a bit niche), etc) where similar to mine.

Moving is easy enough, mostly requiring a DNS update, since I prefer to build the HTML locally and then just dumping it somewhere.

What struck me as odd, when looking for an alternative is that almost none of the popular solutions Netlify, Vercel, Cloudfare (AFAIK) actually implement a spend limit.

This seems like such a basic thing to do...

Re: Serverless Horrors

#40

Post by aetherspawn »

throwawayyy9237 wrote: post #39

Perhaps I'm overreacting, but I had my personal site on Netlify and decided to move it. I don't need anything more than a dumping ground for HTML, and Netlify was "good enough" (I wasn't aware that this issue existed) What brought it closer to home was the characteristics of the recently affect site (same number of daily visits, not popular (a bit niche), etc) where similar to mine. Moving is easy enough, mostly requ…

Cloudflare has DDOS protection which you can set to basically paranoid and once a DDOS starts then everyone will get a captcha. This limits your spend quite effectively.
Post reply on HN