News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Show HN: We moved from AWS to Hetzner, saved 90%, kept IS... by aforwardslash on Tuesday June 24, 2025 @03:18PM (#44369896)
> For example, you'd be hard pressed to find a team building AWS services who is not using SQS and S3 extensively

I design and develop products that rely on queuing systems and object storage; if its SQS or S3 is an implementation detail (although S3 is also a de-facto standard). Some of those products may rely on millions of very small objects/messages; some of them may rely on fixed-size multi-MB blocks. Knowing the workload, you can often optimize it in a non-trivial way, instead if just using what the provider has.

> The hard part is making this system immediately interpretable and getting "put a message in, get a message out" while making the complexities opaque to the consumer.

Not really, no. As you said, is already a solved problem. Aws obviously has different scale requirements than my reality, but by having ownership I also have only a fraction of the problems.

> There's nothing about rolling your own version that will make you better able to plan this out -- many of these lessons are things you only pick up at scale.

I cannot agree with you on this. As an example, can you tell me which isolation level is guaranteed on an Autora instance? And what if it is a multi-zone cluster? (If you can, kudos!); next question is, are developers aware of this?

If you have done any cursory solution design, you will know the importance of mastering the above questions on development workflow.

There are no comments on this comment yet.