There has never been a business in any industry at any era with so much vague pricing and hidden billing items like AWS. You pay 5x than expected because of 2 meters long irrelevant items you didn't even sign up for. Everything is intentionally kept vague to let you take the bait and only realize when it's too late.
No wonder Bezos is the richest man in the world (and soon of all time), this guy outjewed the jews. What a scumbag.
Other urls found in this thread:
esecuredata.com
zeronet.io
datacenterknowledge.com
youtube.com
aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
vultr.com
digitalocean.com
twitter.com
Agree. Dumbfucks switching to EC2 even when self hosting is better for medium applications
What's the best alternative btw? Azure?
b-but muh elastic cloud
Azure and Google cloud would be "similar" services if that's what you mean by alternative. But the truth is, most users of Azure, Google Cloud and AWS, don't actually need those services. A 10 $ / month VPS will do for a lot more use cases than the typical AWS user thinks.
>I was born poor
>I was born manlet
>No girl liked me
>FF 30 years. I fuck young girls from Russia every week.
>I worked my ass off
Why are you jelly?
this is what retards on Jow Forums actually believe
Believe me I've seen it. Some people who use cloud don't actually need them.
not him but I believe you, there are many who use AWS to just buy ec2 instances, but AWS should only be used as a complete cloud solutions where you need ec2, vpc, rds, elb, cloudfront, ses, etc...
if you just want ec2, you better use linode or digitalocean with predictable bills
just got bitten by it, 17 dollars for cloudwatch? what the fuck is a cloudwatch? i don't even use aws for months.
of course i closed the account.
AWS is for large businesses looking to outsource their IT infrastructure to simplify logistics and save time. that's where the savings are for them
it's not economical for small projects and isn't meant to be
google cloud gives you the same features for slighty cheaper but the interface is MUCH more intuitive and it's generally easier to work with
retard ec2 is objectively much more expensive than similar VPS's while also being much slower
where can I find RDS cheap alternatives? I don't want GCP or Azure, just cheap alternatives just like Linode but still managed database
I need to be colocated
you do realize that ec2 costs better, scales more, si more reliable and involves a lot less time wasted in infrastructure? but why am I even wasting breath with you guys... keep up with the NEET lyfe
>Muh joos
Do you mean capitalism?
the only answer to this thread
most things don't need to scale to an extent that having anything more expensive than the cheapest webhosting would ever be necessary
t. NEET
>trying to discuss enterprise IT topics with Jow Forums
there are many here who can discuss this topic, not everybody here is a 17 yo autist
Get a vps and install MySQL, $5/month vps could do it if your database isn't huge. Vancouver, Canada guys for example:
esecuredata.com
that's the thing idiot, I need a managed database, of course I can buy a shitty VPS and install any SQL server, I want a managed database where updates, backups, scaling are automatic
I work with some new-ish developers who have it in they're head you need to use aws. Never mind the fact we have a pretty powerful vsphere server on premise thats actually under utilized.
It's become buzzword bullshit at this point with aws
Get off your ass and manage it yourself.
>Too much of a babby to set it up himself
ENTERPRISE
kys
stick to GoDaddy CPanel nigger shit then
>Don't pay for convenience when you could massively inconvenience yourself by doing everything manually
typical freetard
please NEETs get out, this thread is for people who have jobs
there's a whole industry springing up to migrate people out of the cloud
good goyim.
now go pay those shekels. Jeff don't like waiting
what industry is that?
you think Amazon and the like will allow it?
You realize time has value, right? I know its a foreign concept if you spend all your time jacking off in your moms basement
>jacking off in your moms basement
nice assumption goy
how much time do you think it takes to manage your own shit?
he's probably hinting about the decentralized meme, it's a meme that won't succeed except with statically served requests just like what happened with torrent, today's web nature is totally dynamic
something like this?
>what industry is that?
Cloud to onprem/colo migration, for example datacenterknowledge.com
>you think Amazon and the like will allow it?
What the fuck are they gonna do about it?
>What the fuck are they gonna do about it?
they are gonna infiltrate it and starting to create services for people
>What the fuck are they gonna do about it?
youtube.com
This.
>Updates
Debian unattended-updates package.
>Backup
Seriously? Set up a cron job you brainlet. Your hypervisor should be able to take care of weekly images.
>Scaling
Don't fall for this meme. You don't need scaling. I've pumped a hundred million records per day through a mariadb instance on 32GB memory, some shitty ivy bridge xeon, and a pair of 750s in raid 1. If your load is seriously this heavy then your data design and application architecture matters way more than anything else. Once you outgrow a stout server, good indexing, normalized tables, and a bit of caching, you ought to be making enough money to hire a legitimate database administrator to handle horizontal scaling among a slew of other data health tasks Amazon won't take care of for you, like ensuring new developers don't fuck shit up, converting inefficient heavy load queries into lean stored procedures, or being the data expert in meetings so people don't make bad assumptions about how to go about things.
> trusting a megacorp
> ever
Is there any good megacorp these days?
I bet you don't understand how scary updating a database is, even minor versions
I've seen horror stories about backup/restores just with database cli tools like pg_dump, no real business do such things today, they would pay twice the price for a managed database and not fall for the self managed database meme
Good goy, fall for the capitalist dream that almost no one achieves.
To get there you have to be evil.
I've done plenty of database updates. Security patches always just werk. Major versions are only needed like every two years. All you have to do is restore a weekly image into a test environment and follow the upgrade docs. 99% of the time it just werks. If you're a fancy fucker you can just spin up a new vm with the new version and set up replication from the old one. When you're confident it's good simply fail over to it.
Databases aren't that hard.
I got into consulting for AWS when it was still more or less just an API for EC2. I really hate the koolaid bullshit all these hosted providers pull, it's extremely grating to listen to bullshit day out.
it also pays extremely well I'm rrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiccccccccchhhhhhhhh
>consulting for AWS
how does that work?
If you would of gotten your aws certs you'd know more
>certs
sorry I have a degree and and don't need meme certs, that's should be good for uneducated people like you
I have a degree to but aws certs make as much as opsec which is way harder
>jew
>jew jew jew
>jew
>Thread about a white guy
>jews
>white
this is bait anyway
The vague pricing model and the walled garden approach of AWS really turn me off from it. I much prefer Digital Ocean to AWS. Plus the documentation from Digital Ocean is way better than the shitty documentation AWS puts out.
I also like Digital Ocean since it is more infrastructure as a service compared to AWS which is more of a platform as a service. It seems like it is very easy to get vendor locked with AWS, or any PaaS, which is why I prefer to steer away from it. Once Digital Ocean get their Kubernetes service up sometime this Summer / Fall AWS won't really have anything I want that Digital Ocean doesn't offer.
Never had that problem. It's not cheap, but for EC you just pay per hour and also for storage, it's pretty simple.
just means i shill them out to people adopting them as a provider since i'm familiar with developing in their services. It's a lot of hooey, most of the stuff is just older versions of open source things.
Don't forget traffic. It's fucking expensive. Wanted to host some Garry's Mod servers with a bunch of maps and I paid some bucks just to transfer the maps on it. Fuck that.
do you know that there is no fucking way to list all AWS bought resources? You have to check out every fucking region and every fucking service to be sure you didn't forget anything that's running behind your back
Anyone who uses AWS is moron, especially in the wake of the $600 million dollar contract Bezos made with the CIA
You're being spied on, and your funding the CIA
Talk about a double cucking
What are the practical uses of AWS? It seems to me like some server in the cloud you can just do shit on to avoid having to do it on your own machine. Maybe it has a few built in big data number crunchers n shit. Is that all?
I dont have write permission on AWS. My boss creates the queue. I program the whole feature and tell him message confirmation is being received but cant see no messages on the SQS dashboard. A week goes by, my boss doesnt check. TPM gets mad because feature for another team is not on production yet. I check it again, found out you have to assign access policy to the fucking queue. Cant because I have no write permissions on AWS.
FUCK AWS AND THEIR FUCKING QUEUES AND TOPICS. AND MY BOSS
There are some prebuilt things, but I have never used them. I just use a normal EC instance, which comes with just a new installation of some linux distro or Windows server.
The main benefit for me is, that it's quick to set up and you can use it for only a few hours if you want.
I had to compute some stuff for my thesis for instance and it would have taken too long on my PC. I just used AWS for 2 days, without the need to pay for a month of some dedicated server.
AWs has a lot of services like
>machine learning (face recognition, text recognition, text extraction from pivctures)
>game dev
>IoT
its endless
AWS is very expensive yes
You should only use it if you need rapid scaling.
For example our architecture uses a message bus to distribute work loads to worker instances hosted on dedicated servers. However if there's too much work coming in at peak hours we scale out dynamically with AWS
You don't need to use AWS services 24/7 and you shouldn't because it's very expensive
"I can't read documentation"
the thread
>missing the point this hard
wow
How so? The only parameter required to access a SQS queue is its url. What does the policy do here?
you need write rights to put messages into the queue and read access to retrieve messages
you need permissions to read/write on certain services
I know, but for the SQS specifically, there is nothing in the SDK like an API key or something, it's just the queue url, how does the queue know that the request is coming from an unauthorized producer?
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
docs.aws.amazon.com
You did not read the API then. Do you even AWS?
Every request you send to an AWS Api needs to be signed with the v4 signature mechanism, which one part of is the access key + secret. You basically generate a hash and sign it with your secret key as part of the API request.
You cannot access a SQS just with an url
should you put on your CV that you know how to work with AWS services?
And it all feeds the CIA data center, good job feeding the beast
>And it all feeds the CIA data center
source?
don't bother reply, because you have none.
it's permission per IAM user/group? okay sorry then, I thought it's something else
don't need one other than the business deal Bezos made with them, if you think for an instant that they wouldn't do that they please with AWS, you're either hilariously naive or shilling for them
but CIA and any other 3 letter agency can already access this data through the PRISM program, so it's redundant.
Facebook also uses the billions of photos in Instagram to train/do whatever the fuck
Ok? Doesn't justify using their services
Find a better alternative that isn't going to rape you in costs and potential spying to boot
ITT some anons just started interning at places that use AWS/Azure.
Sure, won't hurt.
>have no clue what you want or need
>don't reach out to aws sales or have a dedicated sales person
>get lost
>end up doing on-demand pricing like a retard
>get big ass bill
literally if you can't be assed to AWS properly, don't use aws or look into aws lightsail instead.
jesus you people are stupid.
>Blaming problems caused by zionist control of the US government on "cis-het" white males
>t. faggot
>Economically disaffected negroids.
Quick Google search pulls up 1 billion fucking hosting companies that have been around longer than AWS. Just go to one of those.
EIG
Fibernet
GoDaddy
Just host
The list goes on and on.
I wish we could, I don't want to go anywhere else to causally talk about work n shit
Listen man. If you haven't realized how absolutely data cucked we are by the TLAs by now then you're either a total retard, extremely ignorant, or a shillbot. The Snowden leak gave us everything we need to know about what the government really thinks about the people.
but how do you deal with records that were added to the current db while you were doing the upgrade on your new db?
You take it offline for the first method. The second method using replication and fail over is 100% online and really isn't any harder. The database engine handles ensuring the two instances are consistent until the old one is brought down.
Aws cost explorer you dingus, if you have that many ec2 instances floating around, teach developers not to do stupid shit or place IAM restrictions, or just use the api to find them
You'll believe it too once you start seeing through buzzwords.
>prices listed
>pay for what you use
What's the issue
IBM cloud is where it's at.
>IBM
What th fuck? I never heard that IBM had a AWS competitor business
Digital Ocean is OK if you require half a dozen permanent instances. For my (((work))) I require booting up hundreds of (((droplets))) making/recovering snapshots etc. The API's are a breeze but because around 5% of the time the vps is broken in a very random way (half working networking/extremely slow cpu/disk doesn't persist all files/doesn't come online at all/'corruption') it's completely shit and the support team just say 'yeah that is fine :))'. So now I rooted some guys.
do you use DigitalOcean in production?
>What's the best alternative btw?
Buy and run your own server. The reason why Dell, HP(E) etc are still selling servers is that not everyone bought into the cloud idea.
>Azure?
No.
What's the best competitor to S3?
I already run home server for majority but want cloud backup for seriously important stuff, in case of fire
Vultr and DigitalOcean have cloud storage services with 1-10$/month
vultr.com
digitalocean.com
Also S3 is really cheap