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

101–110 of 371 posts

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

#101

Post by alisonkisk »

emodendroket wrote: post #59
nameless912 wrote: post #15

And for many projects, Postgres is still cheaper than both. Having used both, I would much, much rather do the work to fit my project in Postgres/CockroachDB than use either Spanner or DynamoDB, which have WAY more footguns. Not to mention sudden cost spikes, vendor lock in, and god knows what else. AWS and GCP (and Azure, and Oracle cloud, and bare Kubernetes via an operator, and...) support Postgres really well. Ju…

I mean sure, NoSQL gives you more opportunities to screw stuff up because it's doing less for you. But it can be a reasonable tradeoff in some scenarios anyway

Spanner and Postgres both support both SQL and NoSQL

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

#102

Post by brunoborges »

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…

> What would have perhaps been a more fair comparison is to share the peak load that Google services running on GCP generated on Spanner, and not the sum of their cloud platform.

Not necessarily about volume of transactions, but this is similar to one of my pet-peeves with statements that use aggregated numbers of compute power.

"Our system has great performance, dealing 5 billion requests per second" means nothing if you don't break down how many RPS per instance of compute unit (e.g. CPU).

Scales of performance are relative, and on a distributed architecture, most systems can scale just by throwing more compute power.

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

#103

Post by bananapub »

Vt71fcAqt7 wrote: post #61
hdjjhhvvhga wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Free Tier is completely irrelevant here, though. The very reason someone might use Spanner is its excellent scalability. I don't believe there is any reason to use it for smaller projects other than education. The customers who will use Spanners are those for whom CockroachDB is not enough, for example. For everybody with databases that are not that huge PostgreSQL will do just fine.

Very true, but most people do not yet no about scale-to-zero pay-for-what-you-use sql server clouds with a free tier like CockroachDB and neon. They think that you must pay $5 a month to run a sql server, which has been the case until very recently, so they go with no sql options to get the free tier. Edit: actualy Spanner looks like another CockroachDB. You use sql to interact with it. In which case I can see many p…

> Edit: actualy Spanner looks like another CockroachDB

lol

cockroachdb is an external reimplementation of some of the ideas of spanner but without depending on excellent clocks.

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

#104

Post by airstrike »

clumsysmurf wrote: post #77
revel wrote: post #31

This thread is already a damning indictment of google cloud. Price cuts alone won't attract customers -- google has sustained significant reputational damage with their crappy customer service and support. That's hard to fix

I've been doing Android development since 1.0, many Android developers are unhappy with the abusive "relationship" they have with Google, because of their control over the Play Store, your developer account, and resolving things if they come up. I'd pick any non-Google tech if there was an alternative.

Are iOS developers happy with Apple's control over the App Store, their developer account, and resolving things if they come up?

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

#105

Post by bananapub »

nameless912 wrote: post #15

And for many projects, Postgres is still cheaper than both. Having used both, I would much, much rather do the work to fit my project in Postgres/CockroachDB than use either Spanner or DynamoDB, which have WAY more footguns. Not to mention sudden cost spikes, vendor lock in, and god knows what else. AWS and GCP (and Azure, and Oracle cloud, and bare Kubernetes via an operator, and...) support Postgres really well. Ju…

> And for many projects, Postgres is still cheaper than both.

ok? and sqlite3 in memory is even cheaper than postgres!

if you can use (and support correctly) postgres then you should use it, obviously there's no point using a globally scalable P-level database if you can just fit all your data on one machine with posthgres.

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

#106

Post by bbu »

Tehnix wrote: post #23
mmanfrin wrote: post #2

Google also has a history of massively spiking the cost of its services. Vendor lockin is a dangerous thing.

Curious: have they ever increased prices of existing Google Cloud services? As far as I know, AWS only ever decreases prices on services for example

yes, massively over the last ~12 months. https://cloud.google.com/storage/pricing-announce

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

#107

Post by airstrike »

nameless912 wrote: post #15

And for many projects, Postgres is still cheaper than both. Having used both, I would much, much rather do the work to fit my project in Postgres/CockroachDB than use either Spanner or DynamoDB, which have WAY more footguns. Not to mention sudden cost spikes, vendor lock in, and god knows what else. AWS and GCP (and Azure, and Oracle cloud, and bare Kubernetes via an operator, and...) support Postgres really well. Ju…

Except for projects for which NoSQL is a better fit than a RDBMS, no?

If I'm writing a chat app with millions of messages and very little in the way of "relationships", should I use Postgres or some flavor of NoSQL? Honest question.

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

#108

Post by nameless912 »

hooverd wrote: post #98
nameless912 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But at low request volumes, either is a rounding error to a medium size enterprise, and for personal projects IMO Lambda is a huge PITA.

/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.

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

#109

Post by remus »

nameless912 wrote: post #15

And for many projects, Postgres is still cheaper than both. Having used both, I would much, much rather do the work to fit my project in Postgres/CockroachDB than use either Spanner or DynamoDB, which have WAY more footguns. Not to mention sudden cost spikes, vendor lock in, and god knows what else. AWS and GCP (and Azure, and Oracle cloud, and bare Kubernetes via an operator, and...) support Postgres really well. Ju…

I know the spanner marketing blurb says you can scale down etc. But I think in practice spanner is primarily aimed at use cases where you'd struggle to fit everything in a single postgres instance.

Having said that I guess I broadly agree with your comment. It seems like a lot of people like to plan for massive scale while they have a handful of actual users.

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

#110

Post by jeffbee »

vlovich123 wrote: post #6
andrewedstrom wrote: post #3

Not pictured: the cost of switching to DynamoDB when this service inevitably gets shut down in two years.

There’s no way spanner gets shut down. It’s critical to so much of Google’s internal infra.

Engaging with comments that are this stupid only perpetuates the problem. Just look at this thread as a whole.
Post reply on HN