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

Cloud Egress Costs

getdeploying.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 318 posts

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#101

Post by echelon »

nyc_data_geek wrote: post #84
amluto wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> other than: it makes migrating to competitors cost-prohibitive in a subset of cases My theory: it forces third party services into the same cloud. Suppose you use AWS and you want to pay a third party SaaS provider for some service involving moderate-to-large amounts of data. Here’s one of many examples: https://www.snowflake.com/en/data-cloud/pricing-options/ And look at this remarkable choice: you get to pick AWS…

It's pretty simple. Excessive egress costs = vendor lock in, and yes, forcing third party services into the same cloud (the walled garden), and limiting customer choice. Just another reason so many orgs are getting heartburn from going too deep too fast into the cloud.

Amazing:

  Cloudflare  --  Free for most services
  OVH Cloud  --  Free and unlimited
  Scaleway  --  Free for most services
Great:

  Hetzner  20-60 TB / mo per instance  $1.08
Not bad:

  Linode  1-20 TB / mo per instance  $5.00
  Oracle Cloud  10 TB / mo  $8.50
A bit much:

  Backblaze  3x the amount of data stored  $10.00
  Bunny CDN  --  $10.00
  DigitalOcean  100 GB - 10 TB / mo per instance  $10.00
  UpCloud  500 GB - 24 TB / mo per instance  $10.77
  Vultr  2 TB / mo for most services  $10.00
Uh...

  Fly.io  100 GB / mo  $20.00
Are you actually serious?

  Microsoft Azure  100 GB / mo  $78.30
  Amazon Web Services  100 GB / mo  $92.16
  Railway  --  $100.00
  Zeabur  10-100 GB, depends on plan  $100.00
  Google Cloud  Depends on service  $111.60
Screw you guys:

  Render  100 GB - 1 TB, depends on plan  $300.00
  Vercel  100 GB - 1 TB, depends on plan  $400.00
  Netlify  100 GB - 1 TB, depends on plan  $550.00
(We use Netlify and have well over 1TB of monthly traffic. They're insanely expensive for what they are. As soon as we have roadmap time to revisit it, we'll move away.)

I'm starting to think of cloud as less of an asset and as more of a liability. We can leverage them for temporary scale, but in no way will we tie ourselves to a particular vendor.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#102

Post by hacker_newz »

geor9e wrote: post #21

I had no idea it was this crazy expensive. I can host a 1 TB folder of movies on my Google Fiber internet Synology NAS website, and let my friend download it for free. But if I hosted my website on Google Cloud, they bill me $111.60? How are these cloud services getting away with this pricing?

Your Google Fiber IP is part of a residential network with a completely different service agreement and larger limitations than Google Cloud.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#103

Post by ehhthing »

Scubabear68 wrote: post #66

The article says “ Cloud providers charge for egress because it costs them money to send data out of their network. They have to pay for the infrastructure and bandwidth required to send data to users”. The charge is not based on cost in the case of the big names. They charge an arm and a leg because they want to keep you and your data on their platform. When you move it you are breaking free. Hence the high costs to…

> They charge an arm and a leg because they want to keep you and your data on their platform. When you move it you are breaking free.

This isn't remotely true.

The bandwidth alliance exists, and a lot of cloud companies are on the list: https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/bandwidth-alliance/

The actual answer is much more complicated. For example, Google Cloud offers two different bandwidth tiers: premium and standard. The calculation on the OP assumes premium since that's the default option, but obviously it's much more expensive.

Google cloud's "premium" bandwidth is much akin to AWS Global Accelerator since it utilizes Google's own backbone network for as long as possible before exiting at the nearest peering point between Google and whatever ISP your end user is at. AWS Global Accelerator has some other options available, that make it fundamentally a different product, but the routing characteristics are much more similar to GCP Premium bandwidth than anything else AWS offers.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#106

Post by cvwright »

api wrote: post #43
ozr wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely lucrative enough. The use case you've described isn't particularly uncommon, but lots of companies just pay for the egress. The problem is that there are now multiple generations of software engineers that do not know how bandwidth is priced. They've only used managed providers that charge per unit of ingress/egress, at some fractional dollar per GB.

I’ve had people refuse to believe that bandwidth is actually very cheap and cloud markup is insane (hundreds or even thousands of times cost). I show them bare metal providers and colo that bills by size of pipe rather than transfer. They refuse to believe it or assume there must be a catch. There usually isn’t, though sometimes the very cheapest skimp on things like rich peering and can be slightly slower or less re…

Equinix bare metal bandwidth is pretty crazy expensive too.

5c/GB is less than the 9c that Amazon charges, but still, ouch.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#107

Post by constrain5795 »

thimp wrote: post #26
PreInternet01 wrote: post #7

The cost of egress traffic is a very good reason for many organizations to not fully migrate to a cloud provider anytime soon. And since, unlike with storage costs, there doesn't seem to be an actual reason (other than: it makes migrating to competitors cost-prohibitive in a subset of cases), that seems kind of... weird? Small example: an actual company I do some work for is in the business of delivering creative ass…

I saw a hilarious fuck up a few months ago. Company sets up an AWS hosted always on VPN solution. Connects 1000 staff through it. Celebrates how they saved $50k on the VPN solution. Gets $25k AWS bill for the just the first month of egress traffic. Turns out the data was leaving AWS egress three separate times.

AWS VPN base cost is $72/mo + $36/u/mo. So they were spending $80k/mo before?

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#109

Post by belter »

PreInternet01 wrote: post #7

The cost of egress traffic is a very good reason for many organizations to not fully migrate to a cloud provider anytime soon. And since, unlike with storage costs, there doesn't seem to be an actual reason (other than: it makes migrating to competitors cost-prohibitive in a subset of cases), that seems kind of... weird? Small example: an actual company I do some work for is in the business of delivering creative ass…

Context matters here. How critical is that workload? What the economic and reputational impact for the company, if one of the physical connections or some technical problem with the data center causes a downtime of hours or days?

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#110

Post by andix »

I would be interested how much discount on the egress fees is possible for big customers. Especially if you're running a service that is heavy on egress, for example something with video processing that also exports/streams videos. Or are those companies just doomed not to use the big three cloud providers?

Those egress prices are not at all about the cost of the traffic, it's more like an additional hidden fee. And a vendor lock in not to use multiple cloud providers.

Post reply on HN