←back to thread

Replacing a $3000/mo Heroku bill with a $55/mo server

(disco.cloud)
804 points jryio | 1 comments | 21 Oct 25 20:28 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
varispeed ◴[21 Oct 25 21:48 UTC] No.45662153[source]▶
Why people discover it only today? I remember making comments about it years ago.

I even shown one customer that their elaborate cluster costing £10k a month could run on a £10 vps faster and with less headache (they set it up for "big data" thinking 50GB is massive. There was no expectation of the database growing substantially beyond that).

Their response? Investors said it must run on the cloud, because they don't want to lose their money if homegrown setup goes down.

So there is that.

replies(1): >>45665360 #
1. Nemo_bis ◴[22 Oct 25 06:00 UTC] No.45665360[source]▶
Yes. The "cloud" is sold on grounds of "efficiency" but really it's just an ideological decision to increase outsourcing and reduce the employees' bargaining power.

(Except this backfires, because a service running on a RHEL or Debian machine might go on for 5-10 years untouched without any particular issue, security aside, while anything relying on kubernetes or the hyperscaler's million little services needs to be tweaked every 6 months and re-engineered every few years or it will completely stop working.)