News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by morgante on Thursday March 02, 2017 @02:36PM (#13777440)
> and the costs of cloud service are zooming up, potentially leaving you without the margin to invest.

What do you mean by this, because it sounds like a straight up lie?

Amazon and Google are in an ongoing price war and cut costs regularly.

Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by hueving on Thursday March 02, 2017 @06:44PM (#13779457)
>What do you mean by this, because it sounds like a straight up lie?

There is no economy of scale with the cloud. As you scale up your service, Amazon/Google happily scale your bill right up with it. When you roll your own datacenter, things get much cheaper per unit (bandwidth, storage, etc) as you get larger.

Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by tbrowbdidnso on Thursday March 02, 2017 @02:39PM (#13777475)
Possibly outgoing bandwidth. These costs are directly proportional to traffic and regularly 20-30x the unmetered rate for a colocated box
Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by morgante on Thursday March 02, 2017 @02:44PM (#13777524)
Yes, cloud bandwidth is expensive. I don't disagree with that. But it's not increasing in price.

Obviously if you're growing your costs will grow, but that's basically a tautology. Bare metal costs also rise as you grow.

Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by dsr_ on Thursday March 02, 2017 @02:51PM (#13777579)
Will you stop calling me a liar if I correct that from "the costs" to "your costs"? I am assuming that you are growing, and I think there's a provable assumption that for high levels of service, hiring someone else to do it is more expensive than in-house.
Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by morgante on Thursday March 02, 2017 @02:57PM (#13777634)
That's an entirely different statement than your original one. Saying "the costs of cloud service are zooming up" disingenuously makes it sound like the price of cloud services are going up.
Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by dsr_ on Thursday March 02, 2017 @03:27PM (#13777870)
Thanks for the charitable interpretation of my words.
Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by user5994461 on Thursday March 02, 2017 @05:20PM (#13778811)
> hiring someone else to do it is more expensive than in-house.

Except you're gonna need between 10 and 100 people to recreate the service in-house, not just one.

Trying to re-do something from scratch in-house is always more expensive than just buying the product.

Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by majewsky on Thursday March 02, 2017 @06:37PM (#13779416)
I get the sentiment, but it really depends: For some services, it's very true. For other services, careful problem analysis will show that you only need one or two features from the full package, which then can be replaced by a very small shell script.
Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by ismail-khan on Friday March 03, 2017 @06:40AM (#13782205)
Can you give an example where a shell script would solve the problem? Curious to know
Re:Why we are not leaving the cloud by majewsky on Friday March 03, 2017 @03:02PM (#13785838)
Last month, I needed to add a periodic job to a simple Rails app to snapshot some data and send it to another system. I discussed the design with a colleague, a Rails expert, who went into the pros and cons of various worker-queue configurations. In the end, I added a hidden API call, and deployed a shell script along the lines of

  while true; do
    curl https://rails.app/do/the/thing
    sleep 3600
  done
The actual version is slightly larger because of error checking etc., but that's the gist. So that's one example of replacing (or rather: avoiding) a distributed system (an asynchronous job queue) with a small shell script.

I don't mean to say that shell scripts always can replace more complex systems, but sometimes they're enough.