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

Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

googlecloudplatform.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–18 of 18 posts

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#11

Post by toomuchtodo »

> HTTP Load Balancing changes the game for how developers interact with network resources. HTTP load balancing can easily scale to support more than 1 million requests per second with no “warm up.”

> And while other providers count each and every IOPS and charge extra for them, SSD persistent disk includes IOPS in the base price with no extra charges or fees, making cost completely predictable and easy to model.

Between Google's price cuts, and releasing features directly addressed at Amazon AWS feature/pricing deficiencies, Google is coming out swinging.

Google vs Amazon's ELBs:

https://aws.amazon.com/articles/1636185810492479#pre-warming

"Amazon ELB is able to handle the vast majority of use cases for our customers without requiring "pre-warming" (configuring the load balancer to have the appropriate level of capacity based on expected traffic). In certain scenarios, such as when flash traffic is expected, or in the case where a load test cannot be configured to gradually increase traffic, we recommend that you contact us to have your load balancer "pre-warmed". We will then configure the load balancer to have the appropriate level of capacity based on the traffic that you expect. We will need to know the start and end dates of your tests or expected flash traffic, the expected request rate per second and the total size of the typical request/response that you will be testing."

Google vs Amazon charging for IOPS:

"And while other providers count each and every IOPS and charge extra for them, SSD persistent disk includes IOPS in the base price with no extra charges or fees, making cost completely predictable and easy to model."

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#12

Post by AaronFriel »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #10
AaronFriel wrote: post #7

Cloud platforms are exciting to me because it seems every new feature presents an opportunity to break out a spreadsheet to figure out performance/$. I'm going to consider 3 cases: CDN: 1TB of storage, 1000 IOPS required. (a cache or "smart"/ACLed CDN) DB: 20GB of storage, 5000 IOPS required. (a moderately sized database) Hybrid: 500GB of storage, 2500 IOPS required. (some composite of the two) A summary of pricing r…

Have a Google spreadsheet link you could share read-only with this?

Here you go, I formatted it up to include formulas and a variety of configurations.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pw9dKHE_pKSEPqQNrNqz...

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#13

Post by _up »

chatmasta wrote: post #3

Exciting developments on the load balancing front. Is anyone able to decipher whether this can be used to load balance external (non-google) services? It looks like the input parameter is simply an external IP, but I haven't looked that closely yet.

Could this be a huge problem for services like Cloudflare. I mean i would trust Google a lot more to be able to survive a huge DDOS.

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#14

Post by _up »

AaronFriel wrote: post #7

Cloud platforms are exciting to me because it seems every new feature presents an opportunity to break out a spreadsheet to figure out performance/$. I'm going to consider 3 cases: CDN: 1TB of storage, 1000 IOPS required. (a cache or "smart"/ACLed CDN) DB: 20GB of storage, 5000 IOPS required. (a moderately sized database) Hybrid: 500GB of storage, 2500 IOPS required. (some composite of the two) A summary of pricing r…

What are the advatages over normal servers. You can get (2x120GB intel ssd (75k iops each)/32gb ram/250 Mbit/s garanteed) servers for around 50$/Month from reputable hosters.

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#15

Post by anko »

_up wrote: post #14
AaronFriel wrote: post #7

Cloud platforms are exciting to me because it seems every new feature presents an opportunity to break out a spreadsheet to figure out performance/$. I'm going to consider 3 cases: CDN: 1TB of storage, 1000 IOPS required. (a cache or "smart"/ACLed CDN) DB: 20GB of storage, 5000 IOPS required. (a moderately sized database) Hybrid: 500GB of storage, 2500 IOPS required. (some composite of the two) A summary of pricing r…

What are the advatages over normal servers. You can get (2x120GB intel ssd (75k iops each)/32gb ram/250 Mbit/s garanteed) servers for around 50$/Month from reputable hosters.

It's a mixed bag really.

I prefer cloud based solutions where load is going to be an issue, but only sporadic load. You can easily spin up a new instance, pay for what you use and not be paying for it the rest of the year too. With the load balances available, this can even be made automatic.

It's also good if you want a dev environment which is exactly the same as production. spin up an environment for a day, then spin it down and only pay for usage.

But there are also downsides - you also want at least 2 servers of anything up at any time in case of a datacenter outage or upgrade. But I guess the availability is the upside of that.

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#16

Post by judkowitz »

soccerdave wrote: post #4
crb wrote: post #2

Google's SSD price is $0.325/GB/mo with 30 IOPS (flat rate). AWS's EBS with provisioned IOPS are SSD backed, and cost $0.125/GB/mo, with $0.10 per IOPS. To get 30 IOPS on AWS would cost $3.125 - almost 10 times as much as at Google. If you're doing more than 2 IOPS, you're better off with GCP.

Not quite a fair comparison because you are showing the price of a 1GB volume. However, if you had a 50 GB volume, then you would be paying $16.25 (50 * 0.325) per month on GCP, and you would be paying $9.25 ((50 * 0.125 + (30 * 0.10)) on Amazon for 30 IOPS. I hope I have my math right here. Let me know if I missed something. If it's correct, then it seems like the bigger the volume that you have, the more sense it w…

Disclaimer: I work for Google as the product manager for Persistent Disk.

I suspect that what crb is referring to is the ratio of 30 IOPS/GB being the top ratio that could be bought and what that would cost on a per GB basis. I don't think crb was suggesting a 1 GB volume.

As for the specific case you describe - looking for 30 IOPS consistently on a 50 GB volume, with Google, there is no need to go to SSD for that or to pay $16.25/month.

- If you meant 30 random reads, you can hit that with 100GB of Standard PD for $4.00/month (with no IO charges)

- If you meant 30 random writes, it's less as 50 GB gets you 75 random write IOPS for $2.00/month (with no IO charges)

At Google, we've tried to bring consistency of performance even to the lower tier of block storage so no matter what level of IO you need, you can count on seeing a consistent level between volumes and over time.

So, how do you choose between the two PD types? As a very coarse rule of thumb:

- If you are looking for 2 random read IOPS / GB or less, growing Standard PD volumes to meet the IOPS needs is the most cost effective route

- If you are looking for 2-30 IOPS/GB, SSD Persistent Disk gets you the better value

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#17

Post by crb »

crb wrote: post #2

Google's SSD price is $0.325/GB/mo with 30 IOPS (flat rate). AWS's EBS with provisioned IOPS are SSD backed, and cost $0.125/GB/mo, with $0.10 per IOPS. To get 30 IOPS on AWS would cost $3.125 - almost 10 times as much as at Google. If you're doing more than 2 IOPS, you're better off with GCP.

(edit: "flat rate" = cost, not total flat rate. The 30 IOPS are per GB, so it scales with volume size. Sorry if I misled.)

Re: Introducing HTTP Load Balancing and SSD Persistent Disk

#18

Post by toomuchtodo »

AaronFriel wrote: post #12
toomuchtodo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have a Google spreadsheet link you could share read-only with this?

Here you go, I formatted it up to include formulas and a variety of configurations. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1pw9dKHE_pKSEPqQNrNqz...

Thank you so much!
Post reply on HN