Re:The cost of cloud, a trillion dollar paradox
by justsomeuser on Friday May 28, 2021 @07:14AM
(#27314002)
At the hyper visor level, I was under the impression that many VM’s are scheduled onto the same hardware CPU core.
One hardware core can be running 5 VMs at 20% capacity, and each VM owner will pay for 100% of their CPU capacity right? So in this case the landlord is renting your unused apartment to other customers then evicting them faster than you can open the door.
My point is cloud is benefiting from that ability and not passing it on the customers, which they could.
Re:The cost of cloud, a trillion dollar paradox
by sofixa on Friday May 28, 2021 @07:58AM
(#27314320)
Your impression is correct for VPS-style "clouds", like Digital Ocean and co.
Its fully wrong for AWS, where a vCPU you rent == physical core/thread.
Re:The cost of cloud, a trillion dollar paradox
by trtechhn on Tuesday June 01, 2021 @04:53PM
(#27361128)
That statement is counter to how "vCPUs" related to "CPU" since early cloud implementation. AWS not taking advantage of the much more efficient "oversubscription ratio" versus thread pinning - unlikely.
Are you certain of this statement?
Re:The cost of cloud, a trillion dollar paradox
by justsomeuser on Friday May 28, 2021 @12:01PM
(#27317036)
How do you know this implementation detail?
AWS don't overprovision CPUs outside of the t instance range, in which you get vCPU credits, not full vCPUs. If you rent an apartment but don't use it, is it the landlord's fault you don't? The landlord can't rent the same appartement to another client.
Especially on AWS/GCP/Azure, where there are many alternatives ( Lambda, Google Cloud Run, Google App Engine, etc.) where you pay per compute used.