We are a B2B company with a sales team that ensures we charge more than enough to cover our infrastructure.
Yes infrastructure cost scale with volume, but with a much lower slope.
But it’s kind of the point, we save money by not having a dedicated infrastructure team, and save time and move faster because it’s not a month long process to provision resources and we don’t request more than we need like in large corporations because the turn around time is long.
At most I send a message to my manager if it is going to cost more than I feel comfortable with and create resources using either a Python script or CloudFormation.
How long do you think it would take for me to spin up a different combination of processing servers and database resources to see which one best meets our cost/performance tradeoff on prem?
Just for reference we ""devops"" around 2 thousand VMs and 120 baremetal servers and a little of cloud stuff through same scripts and workflows.
We don't really leverage locked in cloud things because we need the flexibility of on prems.
In my business hardware is essentially a drop in the bucket of our costs.
P.s: I totally think there are legit use cases for cloud, is just another tool you can leverage depending on the situation
Lambda vs VMs (yes you can deploy standard web apps to Lambda using a lambda proxy)
Serverless Aurora vs Regular Aurora.
Tx instances vs regular instances
Autoscaling VMs.
Autoscaling DynomoDB
Etc.
DELETE FROM orders WHERE $condition_from_website;
So that's just useless. You need offline backups. Is there something like, euhm, perhaps checkpoints, that you can use ?You also get point in time recovery with BackTrack.
https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-aurora-backtrack-tur...
The redundant storage is what gives you the synchronous read replicas that all use the same storage and the capability of having autoscalinv read replicas that are already in sync.
So... A cronjob?
I also have done enough recoveries to know that actually placing back a checkpoint is admitting defeat and stating that you
a) don't know what happened
b) don't have any way to fix it
And often it means
c) don't have any way to prevent it from reoccuring, potentially immediately.
It's a quick and direct action that often satisfies the call to action from above. It is exactly the wrong thing to do. It very rarely solves the issue.
Actually fixing things mostly means putting the checkpoint on another server, and going through a designed fix process.
http://download.nust.na/pub6/mysql/tech-resources/articles/m...
Have you benchmarked the time it takes to bring up a ZFS based Mysql restore?
a) don't know what happened b) don't have any way to fix it And often it means c) don't have any way to prevent it from reoccuring, potentially immediately.
Can you ensure the filesystem consistency when you restore with ZFS?
a) don't know what happened b) don't have any way to fix it And often it means c) don't have any way to prevent it from reoccuring, potentially immediately.
In the example that was given in the parent post, we know what happened:
Someone inadvertently (hopefully) did
Delete * From table
You restore the table to the previous state and you take measures to prevent human error.
And storage for AWS/RDS is .10/gb per month and that includes redundant online storage and backup.
I’m sure I can tell my CTO we should ditch our AWS infrastructure that hosts our clients who each give us six figures each year to host on shared PHP provider and Linode....
And now we have to still manage local servers at a colo for backups....
We also wouldn’t have any trouble with any compliance using a shared PHP host.