261–270 of 406 posts
I'd much rather read an article to know when it's NOT relevant to switch. Someone other than "vendor/service lock-in". I already know that
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Multiple small boxes is actually better than one giant box, for a whole lot of reasons. Scaling isn't the issue.
This needs some context. I can think of several cases where this wouldn’t be the be right.
I never understood the appeal of AWS like cloud for non corporate. Sure, when you run a BigCo, you have all the money and people to throw at big cloud providers, obtaining pointless certificates, and configuring obscure IAM roles. But why small businesses like them, I can’t I understand. I host all my stuff on Hetzner. It’s easy, it’s affordable and I “move fast”. I don’t need certificates to be able to manage the se…
It’s a paperwork thing, not a financial decision.
I'm fully aware this is pedantic, but you can't save 10x. You can pay 1/10. You can save 90%. Your previous costs could have been 10x your current costs. But 10x is more by definition, not less. You can't save it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just one of the couple dozen databases we run for our product in the dev environment alone is over 12 TB. How could I not use the cloud?
12TB is $960/month in gp3 storage alone. You can buy 12TB of NVMe storage for less than $960, and it will be orders of magnitude faster than AWS. Your use case is the _worst_ use case for the cloud.
For some reason people more easily understand the limits of CPU and memory, but overlook disk constantly.
Its true that aws is very expensive for a lot of use cases, as long as you only count the cost of the servers. However, in most (every?) large organisations, buying a server and putting it in a DC, and looking after it, is hugely time-consuming, lengthy and expensive. You need to get quotes, approvals, purchase, rack, commission, maintain etc etc. It is usually close to 1 year to get a server. In some companies, even…
On the other hand, if I request a virtual server, it takes less than a week, and I can work with it much more freely.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On this site, I've seen these kind of takes repeatedly over the past years, so I went ahead and built a little forum that consists of a single Rust binary and SQLite. The binary runs on a Mac Mini in my bedroom with Cloudflare tunnels. I get continuous backups with Litestream, and testing backups is as trivial as running `litestream restore` on my development machine and then running the binary. Despite some pages is…
Just one of the couple dozen databases we run for our product in the dev environment alone is over 12 TB. How could I not use the cloud?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you have high volume traffic depending on time of month, ie finance around ultimo/primo, you might need to scale your performance to 5-10x your normal idle load. If running on your own data center, or renting physical/virtual machines from ie Hetzner, you will pay for that capability overhead for 30.5 days per month, when in reality you only need it for 2-3 days. With the cloud you can simply scale dynamically, an…
> If running on your own data center, or renting physical/virtual machines from ie Hetzner, you will pay for that capability overhead for 30.5 days per month, when in reality you only need it for 2-3 days. I keep seeing this take on here and it just shows most people don't actually know what you can do off the cloud. Hertzner allows you to rent servers by the hour, so you can just do that and only pay for the 2-3 day…
More likely load will spread over time for most scenarios and the server will be ready to handle that with lower hardware specs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not too push the point too hard, but a "dev environment" for a product is for a business (not an individual consumer). Having a server (rack) in an office is not that hard, but alas the cloud might be better here for ease of administration.
My understanding is that aws exists because we can't get any purchase approved in under three months.
I dislike those black and white takes a lot. It's absolutely true that most startups that just run an EC2 instance will save a lot of cash going to Hetzner, Linode, Digital Ocean or whatever. I do host at Hetzner myself and so do a lot of my clients. That being said, the cloud does have a lot of advantages: - You're getting a lot of services readily available. Need offsite backups? A few clicks. Managed database? A f…
When did Linode and DO got dropped and not being part of the cloud ?
What used to separate VPS and Cloud was resources at per second billing. Which DO and Linode along with a lot of 2nd tier hosting also offer. They are part of cloud.
Scaling used to be an issue, because buying and installing your hardware or sending it to DC to be installed and ready takes too much time. Dedicated Servers solution weren't big enough at the time. And the highest Core count at the time was 8 core Xeon CPU in 2010. Today we have EPYC Zen 6c at 256 Core and likely double the IPC. Scaling issues that requires a Rack of server can now be done with 1 single server and fit everything inside RAM.
Managed database? PlanetScale or Neon.
A lot of issues for medium to large size project that "Cloud" managed to solve are no longer an issue in 2025. Unless you are top 5-10% of project that requires these sort of flexibilities.