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

271–280 of 318 posts

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#271

Post by Sytten »

zer00eyz wrote: post #214
quickthrower2 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So an anticompetitive practice.

No. Everyone knew what the costs were going in. AWS, cloud was NEVER the cheaper solution. It was never faster, it was never better. It was easier, and easier came with a price. Like lambs to the slaughter lots of people embraced it. Amazon is a profitable company because of it.

But it was heavily marketed that way so at the very least you have to acknowledge that there was a fair bit of false advertisement...

I don't think making an informed decision has anything to do with competitiveness in any case. Example I might make an informed decision to publish my app on the app store, but this doesn't mean its practices are not anti-competition.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#272

Post by tbragin »

Cloud network egress costs is one of the reasons why increasingly infrastructure vendors likely to incur high data transfer costs (database / data warehouse services, message buses, machine learning, etc..) are moving to introduce BYOC or "Bring Your Own Cloud" deployment model (Data Plane runs in the customer VPC - original Databricks deployment model), instead of only pure SaaS (Data Plane runs in the vendor VPC - e.g. Snowflake) in their cloud offerings.

Databricks now has fully hosted too, but Snowflake still did not go the other way to introduce BYOC. Newer entrants, however - RedPanda, AnyScale, ClickHouse... - are going the way of providing both BYOC and pure SaaS options in their cloud. There are many other reasons to prefer BYOC, legal, security, data privacy, but network egress costs is one of them.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#273

Post by intelVISA »

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…

Between the vendor lock-in and egregious costs it's a sad state for so many in our profession to call this 'the future'.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#274

Post by severino »

msravi wrote: post #192

Hetzner with its ARM offering of 2xvCPU, 4GB RAM, 40GB Storage, 20TB egress at EUR 3.79/mo is unbeatable value for a small-medium website.

The only downside is that Hetzner does not allow you to set a limit to control the egress traffic expenses, does it? So that you can be protected against the so called "denial-of-wallet" attacks.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#275

Post by Wytwwww »

zer00eyz wrote: post #249
quickthrower2 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simply being expensive isn’t anti competitive. I wasn’t suggesting tbat.

I got that, but anticompetitive means something. Cloud wasn't predatory in this... the price has always been there. If you lease a car and they mandate you get your oil changed with them for a price, and the price sucks, that's YOUR fault. No one got locked into the cloud and THEN the egress prices went up... everyone went in knowing this. The industry needs to man up and own shitty decisions rather than double down…

> Cloud wasn't predatory in this.

I'd argue it's still quite predatory. Basically, they reel in users with other services/products and then charge extortionate prices for egress specifically with massive margins just because they can.

In certain use cases it becomes all or nothing, either you host everything on the cloud or nothing at all which is certainly abusive and highly anti-competitive.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#276

Post by stephenr »

naiv wrote: post #2

I think the overview is missing a column of what data is actually allowed for 'free' egress. Iirc eg Cloudflare does not allow videos etc. as part of their free tier. edit: confused ingress and egress

Another factor when it's a CDN is what they will/won't allow to be cached (and thus moving the point of mass-egress from your origin to their network).

Cloudflare has limits on the size of objects that can be cached, making it relatively impractical to use for a download-focused site with resources more than a few hundred MB.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#277

Post by zerr198 »

Beefin wrote: post #257
zerr198 wrote: post #85

We moved to AWS a few years ago, after self-hosting our own storage for years. What a nightmare.. The egress fees were killing us, so we had to find something else. Being weary of these large tech companies, and being that these days we're more privacy conscious as well. We found a new startup that outsources storage nodes to individuals / businesses. You have to install what they call a "relayer" on prem. The relaye…

is AWS Outpost not an option?

Was not familiar with AWS Outpost and honestly just want to get away from the monopolistic tech companies. Though I'm curious. Isn't this product just a way to interface with the storage as you would if it were stored on AWS servers? We would be storing the data locally?

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#278

Post by redox99 »

otmahthe wrote: post #265
redox99 wrote: post #238

I use Oracle Cloud only because of their cheap egress + lots of regions. Hetzner and similar are cheap but don't have enough regions.

What do you think about their services overall ? Do they have serverless computin too ?

Worse than AWS for sure. I only use compute and block storage.

Absurdly good free tier[1], much better pricing, and I like the customizable "flex" VMs instead of hardcoded VM sizes.

[1] Both the true free tier in which you won't get charged anything if you mess up, and the "always free" stuff in the normal pay as you go scheme.

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#279

Post by zer00eyz »

Wytwwww wrote: post #275
zer00eyz wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got that, but anticompetitive means something. Cloud wasn't predatory in this... the price has always been there. If you lease a car and they mandate you get your oil changed with them for a price, and the price sucks, that's YOUR fault. No one got locked into the cloud and THEN the egress prices went up... everyone went in knowing this. The industry needs to man up and own shitty decisions rather than double down…

> Cloud wasn't predatory in this. I'd argue it's still quite predatory. Basically, they reel in users with other services/products and then charge extortionate prices for egress specifically with massive margins just because they can. In certain use cases it becomes all or nothing, either you host everything on the cloud or nothing at all which is certainly abusive and highly anti-competitive.

Sign up now for free (and we will auto charge you next month)... The nice razor handle is cheap, but the blades are expensive.

No one hid the prices from any one... it was all very up front and out in the open. No more data centers no more systems admins, no more capacity planing just scale on a dime... Here is the price chart....

And everyone didn't want to do that HARD work any more. They could just grow and grow and grow and it would save them money.

You know what happens when your not gonna run out of storage or bandwidth or servers... Everything gets bloated.

SO sure, we can say abusive... Amazon abused all the poor stupid vp's who took the lazy way out and let their systems get so fat and bloated on button mashing "l" shaped engineers. Crying about the lock in, about the pricing after you signed up for the service is your own fault. Take the hit and move on!

Re: Cloud Egress Costs

#280

Post by Scubabear68 »

ehhthing wrote: post #212
Scubabear68 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s an impressive word salad, but sorry, no. Egress costs are high strictly to keep you there. This is why egress is dirt cheap on other platforms outside the big 3 cloud providers. This is also why ingress is free.

Ingress is free because it helps them balance their pipes, and it would be really shitty to charge for DDoS attacks. As far as I can tell, with the exception of some really expensive network environments (e.g. China), nobody has ever charged for ingress. With an exception to OVH, none of the cheap providers the article has listed have any kind of backbone network. They all rely fully on transit providers. Turns out b…

Again with the word salad.

It is very simple. If you move your data off cloud provider X, cloud provider X is losing revenue because you are doing things with your data off their platform.

They therefore charge high fees to move your data off the platform to discourage this behavior. Meaning you now need to use cloud provider X’s services to do anything with the data.

Attempts at vendor lock-in have been core to software service companies since they were born.

Post reply on HN