Serverless: slower and more expensive

Re:Serverless: slower and more expensive by chmod775 on Monday September 23, 2019 @04:52AM (#21047094)

A $10 VPS would've been enough to handle the kind of load his site sees too, which is about 15x cheaper again than AWS.

If you're really looking to save money, don't touch AWS.

Source: I run the frontend for an interactive "one-page-app" site about 3x larger on a $30 VPS with room to spare.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Serverless: slower and more expensive by committed on Tuesday September 24, 2019 @10:33AM (#21060591)

Which VPS provider do you use and what is your backend stack?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Serverless: slower and more expensive by chmod775 on Friday September 27, 2019 @07:09AM (#21090573)

The frontend is a ~$30 bucks VPS with OVH. This thing serves about 2 million users / month and about 20k concurrent users (with persistent websocket connections etc.).

The backend is:

- $10 VPS with OVH + $10 VPS as a fallback with another provider for my DB. - $5 VPS with OVH to host my central debian package repository.

- About $500 worth of dedicated servers for serving hundreds of TB of files a month (usually below one petabyte though). This is not really relevant to this discussion, because OPs application doesn't have a file serving aspect to it. His application is basically just my frontend and a DB.

- Small files and thumbnails go through cloudflare for another $20 / month. But the main site and most files don't use cloudflare (they'd kick me out if I passed that kind of traffic through them). They serve about 30TB-70TB of traffic a month on my account.

[ Parent | on HN ]