News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Deploy your side-projects at scale for basically nothing ... by cheriot on Sunday January 12, 2020 @03:19PM (#22028975)
I hope GCP/AWS add a max spend ability. Until then it's complexity of pricing model vs time spent on OS and database management. To each their own.
Re:Deploy your side-projects at scale for basically nothing ... by misterhtmlcss on Sunday January 12, 2020 @03:28PM (#22029058)
It's why I'm on digital ocean. Cheap, but good quality service that's comparable to the big boys and it's capped. $5/month is perfect for me
Re:Deploy your side-projects at scale for basically nothing ... by itake on Sunday January 12, 2020 @03:59PM (#22029291)
I use DO too, but they have deleted a lot of customer data.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17225665

https://blog.checklyhq.com/why-the-recent-digital-ocean-kill...

Keep your stuff backed up.

Re:Deploy your side-projects at scale for basically nothing ... by franciscop on Sunday January 12, 2020 @03:24PM (#22029018)
I use Heroku for these situations where everything is managed automatically. The only con here would be paying more, $20-50/m (Node.js+DB+Redis?) instead of $5/m for DO, but I'm happy to pay for that and spend no time on manual management.
Re:Deploy your side-projects at scale for basically nothing ... by savrajsingh on Sunday January 12, 2020 @04:12PM (#22029388)
You can definitely set limits on GCP
Re:Deploy your side-projects at scale for basically nothing ... by m0zg on Sunday January 12, 2020 @06:53PM (#22030635)
The trouble with this is what do you do when your "max spend" is reached? Shut everything down? Shut parts of it down? Most "real world" systems aren't built to have the stool kicked from underneath them like that, so there will be data/business loss and pissed off customers (and in the case of Cloud also pissed off customers' customers).
Re:Deploy your side-projects at scale for basically nothing ... by cheriot on Sunday January 12, 2020 @09:49PM (#22031446)
The conversation was about side-projects where it's better to have it shut down than drain the owner's checking account. The alternative being an overloaded web server that becomes unavailable.