Nope. Too much overhead for a solo developer or small team. One cloud provider already eats more time than we want to devote to ops.

And the purported benefits of multi-cloud setups are vague, handwavy, "maybe some time in the future" risk mitigation suggestions.

Since AWS won't be disappearing on short notice, we're not particularly concerned about having to pack up and go on short notice. Yeah, it'd be a lot of work, but why do that work up front AND incur ongoing double maintenance costs (in terms of time) on the < 2% chance that we'll decide we need to switch providers some time in the next decade?

Don't do it until you've got a reason to. You're giving up a lot by trying to make a given workload work between providers. Pick a horse, stick with it until you have to change that for business or technical reasons.

Depends on the activity and what i'm storing, like if i want to be safe i use more than 1 for sure , but sometimes i only use 1 for some projects since i don't really like having alot of hosting providers in my hand

Thanks for the reply. Who have you had most success with? I'm trying to decide who to go with on a new project.

If it’s simple enough to go on Heroku, we use Heroku to remove much of the need for devops. More complex things require us to drop down to AWS services directly.

Cool. Is it a pain to manage 2 different providers though?