←back to thread

461 points thunderbong | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.434s | source
Show context
forgotoldacc ◴[] No.42133949[source]
I've been putting off digging into AWS for years now, and it's because of stories like these. There really should be a standardized training course that requires no credit card info and lets people experiment for free.

Instead they have some pencil pushers calculating that they can milk thousands here and there from "user mistakes" that can't be easily disputed, if at all. I'm sure I'm not the only person who's been deterred from their environment due to the rational fear of waking up to massive charges.

replies(4): >>42133979 #>>42133993 #>>42134100 #>>42134549 #
akira2501 ◴[] No.42134549[source]
> I've been putting off digging into AWS for years now

In my opinion people end up in these billing situations because they don't actually "dig in" to AWS. They make their pricing easily accessible, and while it's not always easy to understand, it is relatively easy to test as most costs scale nearly linearly.

> the rational fear of waking up to massive charges.

Stay away from the "wrapper" services. AWS Amplify, or Cloudformation, or any of their Stack type offerings. Use the core services directly yourself. All services have an API. Getting an API key tied to an IAM user is as simple as clicking a button.

Everything else is manageable with reasonable caching and ensuring that your cost model is matched to your revenue model so the services that auto scale cost a nearly fixed percentage of your revenue regardless of current demand. We take seasonal loads without even noticing most years.

Bandwidth is the only real nightmare on AWS, but they offer automatic long term discounts through the console, and slightly better contract discounts through a sales rep. Avoid EC2 for this reason and because internal bandwidth is more expensive from EC2 and favor direct use of Lambda + S3 + CloudFront.

After about 3 months it became pretty easy to predict what combination of services would be the most cost effective to use in the implementation of new user facing functionality.

replies(1): >>42134818 #
dncornholio ◴[] No.42134818[source]
Pretty ironic that you're actually listing more things why I would not use AWS at all. You mention: "stay away from", "ensure that you", "reasonable caching", "bandwidth is the only real nightmare" are all huge red flags.
replies(1): >>42135180 #
1. xmodem ◴[] No.42135180[source]
I thought the point of deploying to the cloud using higher level services was so that I could worry about my app and stop worrying about the minutia of managing load balancers or database servers.

Instead of interesting technical challenges I now get to worry about the minutia of Amazon's billing system. Neat! Where do I sign?

replies(1): >>42135677 #
2. joshstrange ◴[] No.42135677[source]
As with all things, you are trading away old problems for new ones. The question becomes: are the new problems easier for you to solve than the old ones?

There are parts of AWS that feel like magic and parts that cause me to bang my head against the wall, overall I like it more than it annoys me so I use AWS but it’s not a silver bullet and not all workloads make sense on AWS.