71–80 of 92 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/introduction
I know. Compared to Amazon's offering of MySQL, MariaDb, Aurora, SQL Server and Oracle, Google MySQL offering looks not so good. It's hard to persuade everyone to migrate to MySQL. Everyone has their own reason to use different databases.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How much data? 10 TB will "only" cost $900. Alternatively there's the "ship us hard drives" option. Failing that, if you're at a crazy scale, we did announce a switch-and-save program as part of Nearline ( https://cloud.google.com/storage-nearline/ ). Depending on how much you're storing, the one time hit to move may make sense given our ~25% lower cost per byte (and as you mention way better GCE pricing).
How'd you arrive at that number? To my understanding, you get hit up twice -- paying for data leaving S3 and data entering GCS. The other thing to keep in mind is that if lots of your customers are also using AWS, their S3 traffic from you is free.
In addition to free egress within GCP regions, we also recently announced reduced egress pricing for major CDN partners: https://cloud.google.com/interconnect/cdn-interconnect .
So how much data do you store and serve? ;)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my limited Pub/Sub experience, this seems to be how it works. You publish to a topic (an immutable stream), and then create a decoupled subscription that reads messages from the topic. Am I missing something?
I think this sentence [1] helps to explain the difference: > When you create a subscription, the system establishes a sync point. That is, your subscriber is guaranteed to receive any message published after this point. [1] https://cloud.google.com/pubsub/subscriber With Kafka or Kinesis, I can write events to a stream/topic completely independently of any consumer. I can then bring as many consumers online as I want…
1. Can you direct the consumer to a point in stream? (ideally time based i.e messages from 16 Nov UTC)
2. Can old events be auto removed defined by rules?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those services are incredibly proprietary to AWS. I really question why companies would want to tie themselves to a single cloud provider.
Because technology evolves too quickly to do cross-platform, cross-cloud solution and the demand for getting work done now is more demanding than ever. Tried to do it for two cloud platforms + on-premise, you will literally want to kill yourself for supporting your code three-way. Do it right once for one platform, and then next step. AWS isn't going away any time soon. But seriously, you don't just click buttons all…
It run's on all major cloud platforms, VM environments and bare metal. Supported by every major player except Amazon (for obvious reasons, why would they want to support something that makes it easy to migrate away from them?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because technology evolves too quickly to do cross-platform, cross-cloud solution and the demand for getting work done now is more demanding than ever. Tried to do it for two cloud platforms + on-premise, you will literally want to kill yourself for supporting your code three-way. Do it right once for one platform, and then next step. AWS isn't going away any time soon. But seriously, you don't just click buttons all…
Why not Kubernetes? It run's on all major cloud platforms, VM environments and bare metal. Supported by every major player except Amazon (for obvious reasons, why would they want to support something that makes it easy to migrate away from them?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because technology evolves too quickly to do cross-platform, cross-cloud solution and the demand for getting work done now is more demanding than ever. Tried to do it for two cloud platforms + on-premise, you will literally want to kill yourself for supporting your code three-way. Do it right once for one platform, and then next step. AWS isn't going away any time soon. But seriously, you don't just click buttons all…
Why not Kubernetes? It run's on all major cloud platforms, VM environments and bare metal. Supported by every major player except Amazon (for obvious reasons, why would they want to support something that makes it easy to migrate away from them?)
AWS, Microsoft, and Google.
When AWS first started, it was EC2 and S3, so the model was about VM without worrying the bare metal. But as the platform continues to grow to challenge its competitors, the platform will begin to add more services which are only available and are proprietary to the its own platform.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not Kubernetes? It run's on all major cloud platforms, VM environments and bare metal. Supported by every major player except Amazon (for obvious reasons, why would they want to support something that makes it easy to migrate away from them?)
You can, but is Google going to make their environment so compatible with other cloud platform? Actually, how many major players do we have in this space, capable of delivering a true cloud environment? AWS, Microsoft, and Google. When AWS first started, it was EC2 and S3, so the model was about VM without worrying the bare metal. But as the platform continues to grow to challenge its competitors, the platform will b…
Yes. Google's strategy with Kubernetes is to commoditize the cloud - making them all functionally interchangeable. Write to Kubernetes, and your app runs on AWS, GCE, Azure, etc...
They are betting that they can deliver raw CPU cycles, network bandwidth, lower latency etc. - better/faster/cheaper than their competitors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can, but is Google going to make their environment so compatible with other cloud platform? Actually, how many major players do we have in this space, capable of delivering a true cloud environment? AWS, Microsoft, and Google. When AWS first started, it was EC2 and S3, so the model was about VM without worrying the bare metal. But as the platform continues to grow to challenge its competitors, the platform will b…
> is Google going to make their environment so compatible with other cloud platform? Yes. Google's strategy with Kubernetes is to commoditize the cloud - making them all functionally interchangeable. Write to Kubernetes, and your app runs on AWS, GCE, Azure, etc... They are betting that they can deliver raw CPU cycles, network bandwidth, lower latency etc. - better/faster/cheaper than their competitors.
Relational Databases is one key area where Google Cloud can improve. Adding support for the most used databases (Maria, Postgres and may be Google own version of SQL-like AWS Aurora to support large data stores) and easing the migration path for companies to move their databases into Cloud can ease a lot of customer pain. This can accelerate the migration to Cloud much faster. It is very difficult for companies to mo…
Their managed SQL service doesn't support Postgresql and POSTGIS, its the only thing stopping me from move over to GCN.
It's just the first roadblock.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my limited Pub/Sub experience, this seems to be how it works. You publish to a topic (an immutable stream), and then create a decoupled subscription that reads messages from the topic. Am I missing something?
I think this sentence [1] helps to explain the difference: > When you create a subscription, the system establishes a sync point. That is, your subscriber is guaranteed to receive any message published after this point. [1] https://cloud.google.com/pubsub/subscriber With Kafka or Kinesis, I can write events to a stream/topic completely independently of any consumer. I can then bring as many consumers online as I want…
If I understand your point correctly, the only expectation we haven't matched is the ability to "go back and start again". We hear you.