6 ms·

I agree the rollout is a little bumpy but I'm curious what workloads you are using k8s for where a $74/mo (or $300/mo) bill isn't a rounding error in your capex

I agree the rollout is a little bumpy but I'm curious what workloads you are using k8s for where a $74/mo (or $300/mo) bill isn't a rounding error in your capex?

olafure 7y ago
$3600/year is significant for a startup on a shoestring budget.
- nimish 7y ago
  So ask for Google cloud for startups? One free cluster is enough to get started.
  - jorams 7y ago
    > Google Cloud for Startups is designed to help companies that are backed by VCs, incubators, or accelerators, so it's less applicable for small businesses, services, consultancies, and dev shops.[1] This makes it seem like Google Cloud for Startups is aimed at startups that aren't really on a shoestring budget. [1]: https://cloud.google.com/developers/startups/ https://cloud.google.com/developers/startups/
    - p_l 7y ago
      Like every "special offer for startups", it's a vulture waiting for funding round to close.
- dahfizz 7y ago
  Then manage k8s yourself. Or, better yet, don't use k8s. You don't need it, especially as a startup on a shoestring budget. You can migrate later if you decide you really need to, but just a plain LAMP gets you 99% of the way.
  - sheeshkebab 7y ago
    But then you can’t put k8s on you resume for when said startup implodes.
  - Glyptodon 7y ago
    If there were a lower complexity way to deploy containerized apps supported widely I think tons of people would go for it. Currently there's not really much of a middle ground between Cloud Run and K8s offered. It's kind of absurd, honestly.
    - stickfigure 7y ago
      Google App Engine has been exactly this since 2008.
      - Glyptodon 7y ago
        My impression of app engine is that you have to use all the cloud* services like SQL, cache, etc, which will make it significantly more expensive, even if it does that app layer fine. Is that wrong?
        stickfigure 7y ago
        It's wrong today. It was true in 2008, when GAE was Google's entire cloud offering (and there was no Docker or K8s). Around the time "Google Cloud Platform" became a thing, Google changed GAE from an encapsulated bubble into a basic frontend management system that interacts with normal services through public APIs (either inside or outside GCP). It's more expensive than GCE, but it's fully managed and lets you skip the devops team.
ssmw 7y ago
Think about any medium sized dev agency managing 3x environments for 20x customers. That's 50k/year out of the blue. My problem is that this fee doesn't look very "cloud" friendly. Sure the folks with big clusters won't even notice it, but others will sweat it. The appeal of cloud is that costs increase as you go, and flat rates are typically there to add predictability (see BigQuery flat rate). This fee does the opposite.
manigandham 7y ago
It's charged per-cluster. GKE encouraged (and was great for) running multiple clusters for all kinds of isolation and security reasons. This cost increases rapidly for those scenarios.
aaronblohowiak 7y ago
I think you mean opex and not capex here.
a_imho 7y ago
How is it not a rounding error for Google?
Glyptodon 7y ago
My boss viewed it as the main way to deploy containerized systems offered by cloud providers and figured we could run most of our internal only things in it for a couple hundred a month - we don't really need the guarantees and scale, and he saw it as a way to avoid creating excess numbers of dedicated VMs, as cloud run isn't sufficient for our non-static stuff. This view up until now has actually been quite accurate because of the dedicated usage discounts. So I guess the big question in my mind is how do you run containerized apps in the major clouds besides K8s if it's a bulldozer and you just need a cargo bike? Is there something simpler?
- Aethelwulf 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Mesos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Mesos
- YawningAngel 7y ago
  You could consider the flexible app engine
- ickyforce 7y ago
  E.g. https://aws.amazon.com/ecs/ https://aws.amazon.com/ecs/ - that was quite nice https://aws.amazon.com/fargate/ https://aws.amazon.com/fargate/ - haven't tried

I agree the rollout is a little bumpy but I'm curious what workloads you are using k8s for where a $74/mo (or $300/mo) bill isn't a rounding error in your capex?

olafure 7y ago

$3600/year is significant for a startup on a shoestring budget.

nimish 7y ago
So ask for Google cloud for startups? One free cluster is enough to get started.
- jorams 7y ago
  > Google Cloud for Startups is designed to help companies that are backed by VCs, incubators, or accelerators, so it's less applicable for small businesses, services, consultancies, and dev shops.[1] This makes it seem like Google Cloud for Startups is aimed at startups that aren't really on a shoestring budget. [1]: https://cloud.google.com/developers/startups/ https://cloud.google.com/developers/startups/
  - p_l 7y ago
    Like every "special offer for startups", it's a vulture waiting for funding round to close.
dahfizz 7y ago
Then manage k8s yourself. Or, better yet, don't use k8s. You don't need it, especially as a startup on a shoestring budget. You can migrate later if you decide you really need to, but just a plain LAMP gets you 99% of the way.
- sheeshkebab 7y ago
  But then you can’t put k8s on you resume for when said startup implodes.
- Glyptodon 7y ago
  If there were a lower complexity way to deploy containerized apps supported widely I think tons of people would go for it. Currently there's not really much of a middle ground between Cloud Run and K8s offered. It's kind of absurd, honestly.
  - stickfigure 7y ago
    Google App Engine has been exactly this since 2008.
    - Glyptodon 7y ago
      My impression of app engine is that you have to use all the cloud* services like SQL, cache, etc, which will make it significantly more expensive, even if it does that app layer fine. Is that wrong?
      - stickfigure 7y ago
        It's wrong today. It was true in 2008, when GAE was Google's entire cloud offering (and there was no Docker or K8s). Around the time "Google Cloud Platform" became a thing, Google changed GAE from an encapsulated bubble into a basic frontend management system that interacts with normal services through public APIs (either inside or outside GCP). It's more expensive than GCE, but it's fully managed and lets you skip the devops team.

ssmw 7y ago

Think about any medium sized dev agency managing 3x environments for 20x customers. That's 50k/year out of the blue. My problem is that this fee doesn't look very "cloud" friendly. Sure the folks with big clusters won't even notice it, but others will sweat it. The appeal of cloud is that costs increase as you go, and flat rates are typically there to add predictability (see BigQuery flat rate). This fee does the opposite.

manigandham 7y ago

It's charged per-cluster. GKE encouraged (and was great for) running multiple clusters for all kinds of isolation and security reasons. This cost increases rapidly for those scenarios.

aaronblohowiak 7y ago

I think you mean opex and not capex here.

a_imho 7y ago

How is it not a rounding error for Google?

Glyptodon 7y ago

My boss viewed it as the main way to deploy containerized systems offered by cloud providers and figured we could run most of our internal only things in it for a couple hundred a month - we don't really need the guarantees and scale, and he saw it as a way to avoid creating excess numbers of dedicated VMs, as cloud run isn't sufficient for our non-static stuff. This view up until now has actually been quite accurate because of the dedicated usage discounts. So I guess the big question in my mind is how do you run containerized apps in the major clouds besides K8s if it's a bulldozer and you just need a cargo bike? Is there something simpler?

Aethelwulf 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Mesos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Mesos
YawningAngel 7y ago
You could consider the flexible app engine
ickyforce 7y ago
E.g. https://aws.amazon.com/ecs/ https://aws.amazon.com/ecs/ - that was quite nice https://aws.amazon.com/fargate/ https://aws.amazon.com/fargate/ - haven't tried