[slotrans]

Not sure about the goal of providing a hosted service cheaper than SQS. SQS is already one of the cheapest services on Earth. It's pretty hard to spend more than a few bucks a month, even if you really try!

[memset]

That is fair. Two things to validate from a biz perspective:

1. Is there some threshold where this would make sense financially (n billions of messages.)

2. Are the extra developer features (ie, larger message sizes, observability, DAGs) worth it for people to switch?

Would love your thoughts - what, if anything, would make you even entertain moving to a different queue system?

[GordonS]

Not the GP, but I also think you'll struggle to compete in the hosted service space.

Maybe you could add a web admin GUI as a paid add on?

[threecheese]

What is your target market? Cloud-native is, like the commenter said, going to be difficult to differentiate based on cost. I can see this being useful for hybrid cloud (onprem instances), functional or local testing, “localfirst” workloads, enthusiasts etc.

[PanMan]

This depends on your definition of few.. but SQS costs us more than the servers handling the messages… It’s cheap until you do billions of messages…