←back to thread

WebSockets cost us $1M on our AWS bill

(www.recall.ai)
362 points tosh | 3 comments | 06 Nov 24 18:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.383s | source
Show context
yapyap ◴[06 Nov 24 19:56 UTC] No.42068374[source]▶
> But it turns out that if you IPC 1TB of video per second on AWS it can result in enormous bills when done inefficiently.

that’s surprising to.. almost no one? 1TBPS is nothing to scoff at

replies(1): >>42068504 #
blibble ◴[06 Nov 24 20:06 UTC] No.42068504[source]▶
in terms of IPC, DDR5 can do about 50GB/s per memory channel

assuming you're only shuffling bytes around, on bare metal this would be ~20 DDR5 channels worth

or 2 servers (12 channels/server for EPYC)

you can get an awful lot of compute these days for not very much money

(shipping your code to the compressed video instead of the exact opposite would probably make more sense though)

replies(1): >>42070033 #
1. pyrolistical ◴[06 Nov 24 21:51 UTC] No.42070033[source]▶
Terabits vs gigabytes
replies(2): >>42072147 #>>42076964 #
2. blibble ◴[07 Nov 24 01:10 UTC] No.42072147[source]▶
multiply 50 gigabytes * 20 and tell me what you get

pro-tip: it's quite a bit bigger than a terabit

3. CyberDildonics ◴[07 Nov 24 14:36 UTC] No.42076964[source]▶
Terabits vs gigabytes

What does this mean? The article says 'TB' which would be terabytes. Terabytes are made out of gigabytes. There is nothing faster than straight memory bandwidth. DDR5 has 64 GB/s max. 12 channels of that is 768 GB/s.

Terabytes per second is going to take multiple computers, but it will be a lot less computers if you're using shared memory bandwidth and not some sort of networking loopback.