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

Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 836 posts

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#611

Post by benterix »

raiyu wrote: post #418
noir_lord wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any cloud platform should have a spend-stop amount built in. i.e. if I know I average $10 a day, I should be able to put in a "If it hits $50, email me and take it offline". Of course the opposite problem is then people setting that limit too low but since the user defines the limit that's on them not you. This is one of the reasons I still in 2024 rent physical boxes and run the modern stuff on top of them directly,…

We did this at DigitalOcean for similar reasons, wasn't a feature that was commonly used. Additionally, when you set that limit people then get upset because usually when they go over it for a good reason, like going viral, they aren't anticipating it, and just when their traffic is most valuable the site is down. What Netlify is doing here is really the best approach for both parties. And typically speaking a $104k…

Just want to chime in:

1) Thank you for allowing us to set the limit.

2) I understand your opinion that you prefer chargebacks but I disagree with it.

The very reason I stay with Hetzner is that I know in advance what my bills will be for the whole year. Heck, I even charge my account in advance so that I don't worry about any charges!

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#612

Post by dboreham »

coryrc wrote: post #600
safety1st wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not really. Not really what attorneys do. There might be collections agencies interested in recovering the debt, but if it's some rando guy who doesn't have the money, even that is open to debate. I mean I'm not familiar with every debt collection scenario under the sun but Internet randos seem to think this is a real thing where like a cloud/hosting company sends an army of lawyers to repo some guy's house and r…

Traffic doesn't cost money. Bandwidth costs money. Unused bandwidth doesn't cost less than used bandwidth. So, no, you shouldn't pay so much for something that doesn't cost them any money?

> Traffic doesn't cost money.

Mostly false. Either transit is billed on a 95th%ile basis (so...more money for more traffic), or if it is flat/netted, you're still paying for the capex for the switch ports (fatter connection to support more traffic means more $$$ for the gear to support it).

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#613

Post by dmw_ng »

ignoramous wrote: post #129
ji_zai wrote: post #74

This is my worst nightmare as a bootstrapped founder. And that there's no way to put a limit on spend is ridiculous. Someone that doesn't want me to do well can simply ddos me into bankruptcy out of nowhere. Just went through Vercel's docs: --- "Vercel helps to mitigate against L3 and L4 DDoS attacks at the platform level. Usage will be incurred for requests that are successfully served prior to us automatically miti…

> Cloudflare's ddos protection Yeah, we got hammered once with over 10TB/mo and noped out of Netlify as fast as we could: https://twitter.com/rethinkdns/status/1370342245841342466 Had to pay the bill in full. Cloudflare's free tier is ridiculous: We do over 30TB+ of genuine traffic for $0. Makes it hard to move to any other platform. As a small tech shop, this is my Hotel California I'm happy to never leave.

I don't think it's fair to call it their free tier - it's their discretionary tier, there are numerous cases of the rug being pulled as and when it suits their business requirements to do so. Being left homeless vs. urgently coughing up is exactly the wrong problem to be dealing with mid-attack, I can't see any way to consider it free by any practical definition

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#614

Post by rKarpinski »

gempir wrote: post #132
rKarpinski wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't make me feel great about Vercel either (which I was looking at)

Why? If you use Vercel in the Free Tier you cannot automatically go to the Pro tier. You need to manually upgrade. Unless you need more than the Free-Tier Vercel should be fine.

Would be for a new business. Not a fan of introducing this sort of tail risk & whatever other risks I don't even know about for their managed service, when there are simpler ways to host I've done for years.

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#615

Post by kirubakaran »

sph wrote: post #547
ignoramous wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cloudflare's ddos protection Yeah, we got hammered once with over 10TB/mo and noped out of Netlify as fast as we could: https://twitter.com/rethinkdns/status/1370342245841342466 Had to pay the bill in full. Cloudflare's free tier is ridiculous: We do over 30TB+ of genuine traffic for $0. Makes it hard to move to any other platform. As a small tech shop, this is my Hotel California I'm happy to never leave.

> Cloudflare's free tier is ridiculous: We do over 30TB+ of genuine traffic for $0. Makes it hard to move to any other platform. As a small tech shop, this is my Hotel California I'm happy to never leave. Yeah that's how Cloudflare can reach total control over the Internet. With thunderous applause by people that should know better. I know that my position is outright blasphemous in this day and age, where even self-…

I dread the day they go evil

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#616

Post by tacone »

bobfunk wrote: post #317

Netlify CEO here. Our support team has reached out to the user from the thread to let them know they're not getting charged for this. It's currently our policy to not shut down free sites during traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns, but instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact. Apologies that this didn't come through in the initial support reply.

Hello bobfunk, thank you for acting on this.

One question though, what is Netlify gonna do to ensure this doesn't happen again?

I understand it's a hairy question, but the general consensus seems to be some policy must be changed or at least some line should be drawn.

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#617

Post by Saris »

whatshisface wrote: post #254
DontBreakAlex wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because amazon and big telecom convinced you that bandwidth is expensive. It isn't. Once the equipment is there, you might as well use it.

Wouldn't there be at least a handful of competitors if the economics worked out that way?

There are tons, the big providers like AWS, GCS, etc are really the only ones who charge ridiculous amounts for bandwidth and everything else.

Those big providers have pretty much normalized high fees and convinced people that's what it costs, the reality is any normal provider like Hetzner for example gives you tons of bandwidth for essentially zero cost included with your servers.

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#618

Post by phyzome »

bobfunk wrote: post #317

Netlify CEO here. Our support team has reached out to the user from the thread to let them know they're not getting charged for this. It's currently our policy to not shut down free sites during traffic spikes that doesn't match attack patterns, but instead forgiving any bills from legitimate mistakes after the fact. Apologies that this didn't come through in the initial support reply.

« Apologies that this didn't come through in the initial support reply. »

"Didn't come through" doesn't actually match the user's report of having support explicitly offering 20% and then 5% payment. It sounds like maybe you have a training problem? That seems like one of the important points to speak to.

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#619

Post by Saris »

injuly wrote: post #85
jzebedee wrote: post #13

The most bizarre thing is that this is a known issue that folks have asked them for ways to mitigate, to no avail. The reddit thread even links to an extremely weird dialogue where Netlify's response boils down to, "if you're hosting a small site that gets DDoS'd, don't." https://answers.netlify.com/t/limit-bandwidth-to-avoid-high-...

I'm hesitant to use "fancy" cloud service/hosting providers for reasons like this. I don't understand why they won't just raise a 503 if the traffic exceeds the spend limit, or at the very least provide that as an option.

Yep, for a static site you can throw nginx on some VPS for $10 a year and it'll handle a decent amount of traffic.

Re: Netlify just sent me a $104k bill for a simple static site

#620

Post by Saris »

I feel like unless a customer very explicitly opts in saying "I NEVER want my site to go down" then the host should just shut the site down if traffic spikes to high levels.

>Since Netlify charges 55$/100GB for the exceeding bandwidth

Absolutely absurd fees, there is no basis in reality for that. Sounds like a very scummy company.

Post reply on HN