top | item 42057944

(no title)

hggigg | 1 year ago

Wise person. Wish we hadn't. Managed to multiply costs 8x (no joke).

discuss

order

thrw42A8N|1 year ago

No way that is true if you did it properly. Practically nobody has a workload where this could be true - and it's definitely not a workload smaller than several DCs.

It doesn't work out well if you just create some long lived EC2 instances and call it a day. But that's not really using a cloud, just a VPS - and that has indeed never been cheaper than having your own servers. You need to go cloud native if you want to save money.

kasey_junk|1 year ago

Any egress heavy workload can quickly cost more on cloud than on prem. Especially if you’ve got consistent egress bandwidth that can be negotiated against.

hggigg|1 year ago

It’s easy. Lift and shift, then fuck it up by not quite completely migrate everything to numerous badly managed kubernetes clusters. That’s what we did.

dlisboa|1 year ago

> No way that is true if you did it properly.

It's quite easier to mess up in a hyperscaling cloud because it's extremely forgiving. In a different setting you wouldn't be able to make as many mistakes and would have to stop the world and fix the issue.

randomcarbloke|1 year ago

there is absolutely a crossover point at which it would've made more sense to stay put.

My organisation is feeling it now and while our cloud environment isn't fully optimised it has been designed with cost in mind.

Using opex to make up for otherwise unjustifiable capex is suitable only in the beginning or if you need the latest servers every six (or whatever) months