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

Accident Forgiveness

fly.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 310 posts

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#131

Post by commercialnix »

javcasas wrote: post #69
paxys wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Competition only matters for new contracts. Once you have picked a provider and made a big enough infrastructure investment, there's no realistic path to switch to someone else.

They laugh at me for constructing as much as I can from the infra as plain kubernetes objects. Keep laughing, I can switch clouds in less time than you take for figuring out cloud costs.

Keeping everything, including mission critical databases, "inside" Kubernetes is smart. The smart people keep everything "in" Kubernetes. Everyone else can pay up.

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#133

Post by aidenn0 »

hinkley wrote: post #97
gwbas1c wrote: post #16

> and may only come within tens of dollars of accurately predicting your water bill. Whenever I've had to water new grass seed I've always been surprised by my water bill.

There’s a guy on Reddit a couple days ago showing off his softball sized watermelon he grew with a $100 watering bill. The struggle is real.

$100 is like 14HCF where I live (though it includes sweage).

[edit]

14, not 12HCF.

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#134

Post by aidenn0 »

tptacek wrote: post #71

Y'all really, really want caps. We think that's a crazy feature. We don't want to do it. But I just had this conversation on a Slack with a bunch of friends at other companies and they were just as yell-y about this. There's a threshold of feedback at which I think you could get us to do some kind of cap thingo. I'm just saying. Yeesh.

I think hobbyists 100% want caps, businesses don't know what they want (but would be happier without caps if they could experience the counterfactual) and former hobbyists hired to work for businesses will put caps on if they are available.

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#135

Post by commercialnix »

tomjen3 wrote: post #11

I really, really wish there was just a way to put a hard limit on how much a cloud could charge me. I am never going to want to spend 200k of my personal money on some project on a cloud. Never. I don't even want my ant-based basket viewing project simulator to cost me 1 thousand dollars because it went viral and all clouds overcharge for bandwith. Just let me put in a limit.

Would you be interested in a cloud provider that did not charge for inbound or responding (outbound in response) bandwidth?

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#136

Post by foota »

bitbasher wrote: post #93
tonnydourado wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're paying $39/month for something that generates $0/month, that is a very sensible policy. When you're paying $50,000/month for something that generates $200,000/month in value, or if an outage can generate $100,000/month in costs, or if the people that can fix an outage cost $100,000/year, then it's not.

Then that company's threshold for "sensible monthly cost" would be a lot higher. 500k? 1m? Give them the option to set something.

Why would you prefer this when the alternative is no downtime and the provider forgiving the bill?

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#137

Post by myaccountonhn »

tptacek wrote: post #100
bee_rider wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your position is essentially that you mostly want to serve people who have serious apps, for whom the cap idea doesn’t work. And you definitely know more about the general trajectory of your customers than all of us sitting here randomly speculating. But, is it really so uncommon for an application to transition from unserious, I want to cap, to serious? I guess I’m slightly confused because I thought one of…

Sure, but bear in mind that across the entire industry of public clouds, which has been around for something like 2 decades now, nobody really has this feature. In fact, didn't Google have this feature and then pull it?

I've def. wanted to have spending caps on a lot of my projects. The ones I've tried: AWS and GCP made this ridiculously difficult. It might be that they will waiver the bill, but the general feeling that they get to decide if I go bankrupt or not is nightmare fuel.

In the end, I've just set up a 5$ vps where I self-host all my apps. That removes all the stress.

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#138

Post by reducesuffering »

osbulbul wrote: post #29

the biggest reason of I am not using aws, google cloud, vercel etc... for my personal projects is surprise bills. I am not earning anything from them so I can only put $50 but can't afford $500 or $5000. so still i will feel much more secure if I can put hard limit and absolutely sure my bill will never go above $50. (or cloud billing insurance :)) but you got my attention, i can try fly.io

Vercel has spending caps as of about a month ago.

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#139

Post by yyhhsj0521 »

foota wrote: post #136
bitbasher wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that company's threshold for "sensible monthly cost" would be a lot higher. 500k? 1m? Give them the option to set something.

Why would you prefer this when the alternative is no downtime and the provider forgiving the bill?

> provider forgiving the bill

That eventually will be factor into the price like credit card fraud insurance. Better have it be more transparent.

Re: Accident Forgiveness

#140

Post by Aeolun »

> may only come within tens of dollars of accurately predicting your water bill

Uh, what is the magnitude of these water bills? I’m fairly certain I can predict it to within a few dollars because it’s only $35 in the first place.

Post reply on HN