7 ms·
> You might want to reduce costs with lambdas and DynamoDB. I don't think that's ever saved money. > because if they had that experience, they would have nev
by groundzeros2015 28d ago
> You might want to reduce costs with lambdas and DynamoDB.
I don't think that's ever saved money.
> because if they had that experience, they would have never written this article.
That's not true.
- throwawaythekey 28d ago> I don't think that's ever saved money. I spent about a year as a consultant in the AWS space, visited about ~15 clients of varying sizes. More often than not there's a single pg aurora instance responsible for 50%+ of the bill. Even worse are the serverless aurora offenders. All the indexes and guarantees of PG don't come cheaply and dynamodb pricing is not cheap but comparatively reasonable. It really is a good product if you know how to use it.
- groundzeros2015 27d ago> All the indexes and guarantees of PG don't come cheaply I’m currently paying digital ocean about 30 dollars a month for 4 commercial websites with fully featured Postgres.
- ChicagoDave 22d agoI would be framing my comments around enterprise architecture. For one off websites, cheaper on digital ocean is always the winner.