I wonder if they will consider expanding the cloud report to things that are not necessarily relevant to Cockroach labs use-case. In my work, latency to the block store (especially outliers) is very relevant. It would be great to see latency distributions of various workloads (sequential/random and read/write/mixed) to the patform's distributed block store. edit: I missed that 95th percentile latency for read and wri…
You can tradeoff talk latency vs cost yourself easily. For example, you could have two copies of your data in the block store, and issue reads to both simultaneously, and use whichever returns first. Suddenly, your 99% latency becomes your 99.99% latency... You can do the same for writes (albeit a bit more complex).
AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
61–70 of 104 posts
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#62I've also benchmarked GCP vs. AWS [0], and, for the tests that I ran, found that GCP outperformed AWS by a factor of 3:1. Specifically, a GCP instance n1-highcpu-8 with a 256GB pd-ssd disk, clocked in at 11,728 IOPS vs an AWS c4.xlarge with a 256GB gp2 disk, clocking in at 3,634 IOPS. To put that in context of the blog post, it means your setup can drastically affect your results. Using local NVMe disk, for example,…
I don't think the AWS side of your test is a good example. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/EBSVolum... You will never get more than ~3,000 iops on a 256GB gp2 disk because the IOP cap for gp2 type disks of this size is 768 or 3,000 iops. Yes, "or". If you ran the test above for longer, you'd find that the iops will eventually drop to the baseline of 768 (which is the size of your disk multiplied t…
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#63There might be a networking cap & disk I/O issues with the instances you picked on GCP vs AWS. The GCP instance has 8 Gbps vs 10 Gbps for AWS. I don't really know without seeing the graphs from the instances, if you hit a cap, but this could make a difference in both transfer speeds and latency #'s for GCP. Also, for your local disk test, on GCP, disk size makes a difference to get the best performance. The larger th…
https://cloud.google.com/vpc/docs/advanced-vpc#measurenetwor...
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#64I wrote about this last year if you're curious: https://medium.com/@robaboukhalil/a-tale-of-two-clouds-amazo...
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#65For someone who has worked with both: which offers a better developer onboarding experience, for small web/data apps? Ease of learning and use wise.
It depends on your goals. If you're planning on just setting up a couple of servers then it's all much the same. However for scaling and maintenance I prefer AWS with a tool like Terraform to manage infrastructure. It forces you to think of situations like replacing servers, as you'll have to replace them at some point. I think Google's AppEngine is easier for starting, but AWS Lambda + API Gateway is pretty close IM…
In my experience, most folks choose GCP for the Kubernetes offerings which is vastly superior in terms of scaling and maintenance than EKS. Specifically, there are actually upgrades that actually work. There's also autoscaling nodepools which work pretty well.
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#66Developer experience on GCP is vastly superior to AWS. - Pricing on GCP is much easier, no need to purchase reserved instances, figure out all the details and buried AWS billing rules. Run your GCP instances and automatically get discounts. AWS reserved instances requires knowing your instance types, knowing that you can purchase the smallest type of an instance class and combine, knowing that you can only purchase 2…
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#67Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#68Hey all - Seth from Google here. Thank you to the authors who worked on this report. These types of reports help us better understand the ways in which our customers and partners utilize our platform. Our team is reviewing the report and will provide a response as we conduct our own benchmarks. Varying factors impact these types of benchmark analyses, many of which are difficult to isolate and control. As an example,…
Where will we find the responses?
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just looking at the report's second graph, c5d.4xlarge has twice the throughput of i3.4xlarge, which is incredible. I wish AWS would release a new generation of "i" instances, with the same large amount of local storage as i3, but built on the same platform (including Nitro and processor choices) as c5/m5.
> I wish AWS would release a new generation of "i" instances, with the same large amount of local storage as i3 I figure they can't. [Economically, I mean.] I always figured the "local per-instance storage" on most instance-types was actually not literally local, but rather a set of disks allocated from a per-rack iSCSI disk server. (The host "wastage" if this wasn't true would be quite large.) The "i" instance-type…
this works reliably, native speed, not too expensive and is well tested.
Re: AWS Outperforms GCP in the 2018 Cloud Report
#70Choosing a cloud provider is about more than just performance. For me, I lean towards GCP because of the combination of awesome UX, custom VM configurations (which also means GPUs attached to a custom # CPUs), no-bidding spot instances, and the multi-regional cloud storage offering that replicates data across many regions for much cheaper than AWS. I wrote about this last year if you're curious: https://medium.com/@r…