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

Storage on Vercel

vercel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 144 posts

Re: Storage on Vercel

#81

Post by orf »

leerob wrote: post #9
MattIPv4 wrote: post #4

Cloudflare's R2 costs $0.36 per million read operations (after the 10 million you get for free) [1]. Vercel is wrapping R2 and is charging $2 per million reads [2]. They're also charging $0.15/GB for egress (after the 1GB you get free), when R2 charges nothing, and the storage cost is doubled from $0.015/GB on R2 to $0.03/GB on Vercel. That's quite the cost increase for the DX improvement. [1] https://developers.clou…

This isn't finalized yet, apologies for the confusion. We'll be updating the pricing for Blob shortly (it's in private beta and invite only). The pricing for KV and Postgres is up to date.

Why not remove the pricing table or add a note about that then? It’s not great having it there if it’s incorrect, especially after an announcement.

Re: Storage on Vercel

#82

Post by antod »

cccybernetic wrote: post #49
ghc wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic VC-backed B2B play. The trick, however, is finding a "wedge" people actually want on its own. Unfortunately that seems to be easier said than done.

There’s a lot of magic with Vercel, but I think the true “wedge” was clear to many people: DX. The trick was really the execution, which they nailed. They realized early that there was a whole class of developers out there, many of them quite talented, who couldn’t stand SSH’ing into Linux boxes, configuring htaccess files, installing SSL certificates, etc. Many of these developers also worked at big companies, and h…

I kinda feel there was quite a time and tech stack gap between sshing into a server to edit .htaccess files and Vercel.

I wouldn't think that live .htaccess file editing was what they were disrupting :)

Re: Storage on Vercel

#83

Post by MuffinFlavored »

dexterdog wrote: post #20
leerob wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't finalized yet, apologies for the confusion. We'll be updating the pricing for Blob shortly (it's in private beta and invite only). The pricing for KV and Postgres is up to date.

I already lean away from S3/Azureblob/etc because their egress prices are terrible. .15/GB is borderline criminal.

What's a cheaper alternative that is of similar quality?

Re: Storage on Vercel

#84

Post by mrcwinn »

Demonto wrote: post #67
dexterdog wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already lean away from S3/Azureblob/etc because their egress prices are terrible. .15/GB is borderline criminal.

150$ for a TB traffic?! Wtf

What’s happening right now is a story we’ve seen plenty of times before. Overhead cost of convenience mixed with vendor lock-in, all while boasting about open source.

I’d love to create tools that were convenient and had fair pricing. The challenge is that you’re trying to grow into a market with worse acquisition economics. Tough to win if winning is the goal. If anyone has a solution reach out. XD

Re: Storage on Vercel

#85

Post by diroussel »

vultour wrote: post #54
swyx wrote: post #2

Vercel is the second company to “eat the cloud from outside in”. ( https://www.swyx.io/cloudflare-go ) its now my defacto playbook for building lasting bottom up disruptive cloud companies. start by giving away an extremely good free tier (cloudflare - cdn, vercel - nextjs+hosting) then add build time compute, run time compute, readonly kv store, and now full read write storage. (this is part of an overall cloud prog…

Will they run my workloads without requiring my attention for decades? I'd love to rewrite and move some old PHP sites from my webhost, but that one has been hosting them without requiring my attention for probably close to 15 years. I'm a little skeptical these fancy cloud runtimes will even exist a few years from now.

Also nodejs is deprecating versions at an impressive rate. Todays LTS will be out of date soon. AWS and thus Vercel have to follow along. So you can’t run a node based serverless app for more than a year or two before you either put the work in to upgrade or just cross your fingers that the forced upgrade won’t break your app.

Re: Storage on Vercel

#86

Post by throwingrocks »

swyx wrote: post #2

Vercel is the second company to “eat the cloud from outside in”. ( https://www.swyx.io/cloudflare-go ) its now my defacto playbook for building lasting bottom up disruptive cloud companies. start by giving away an extremely good free tier (cloudflare - cdn, vercel - nextjs+hosting) then add build time compute, run time compute, readonly kv store, and now full read write storage. (this is part of an overall cloud prog…

> now my defacto playbook for building lasting bottom up disruptive cloud companies

What companies have you built (or played a role in building) using this "playbook" that fit your description?

Re: Storage on Vercel

#87

Post by jamesmcintyre »

I'm wondering why vercel chose upstash vs cloudflare kv store? I've worked on very large deployments of cloudflare workers + kv store and the performance is amazing (and pricing). It would seem to me that upstash would add hops/latency vs cloudflare kv store?

Re: Storage on Vercel

#88

Post by ethomson »

bluebeel wrote: post #77
cccybernetic wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consumers have always been willing to pay a premium for simplicity & convenience. No difference here: devs will pay for DX.

I understand that bu Vercel KV is almost 2x more expensive than Upstash. Even the vercel/kv package is just a wrapper for upstash/redis - I mean what is the benefit of using Vercel KV instead of Upstash? What DX is improved? Upstash offers a nice UI and easy integration with edge functions and lambas functions. It's the same with neon database and cloudflare r2. The only plus value I see is the centralised dashboard.…

Product Manager for Vercel's storage products here. Today we announced three new storage products in beta; they're based on infrastructure that are provided by partners. There's a lot that goes in to pricing products -- and our products are distinct from our partners' products. We have different roadmaps and will introduce different features as we continue development. So I don't love to make too many comparisons between apples and oranges.

But I suspect that you might be comparing Upstash's per-command pricing for _regional_ requests ($0.20 per 100k) to Vercel KV's? In fact, Vercel KV is multi-region, so the more apt comparison is Upstash's pricing for _global_ requests ($0.40 per 100k).

Re: Storage on Vercel

#89

Post by chrismsimpson »

Serverless everywhere yields apps with massive latency & loading times and if timeouts aren’t well tuned (read: set unreasonably high) you often get dropped connections on api calls. I am currently migrating an app off vercel to raw compute (EC2) and the difference is night and day.

Re: Storage on Vercel

#90

Post by eropple »

mrkurt wrote: post #60
asadm wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Users don't care about that.

They do, actually. We don't say anything about running our own infrastructure. And every time someone finds out, they're like "why didn't you lead with that?" I'm surprised how much people care about what's under the covers.

I think that in many ways is because Fly's approach is sufficiently high-minded (in other words, aiming most comfortably at relatively difficult problems) that it's probably pretty automatic to assume that it's built on an existing hyperscaler. Mentioning that you run your own infrastructure adds encouragement that you know what you're doing.

Given the general state of PaaS offerings, this is a differentiator.

Post reply on HN