Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
christopher
@christopher
am i wrong to think that GCP Cloud SQL absolutely should not cost $254/month for the base instance type? this seems wildly expensive
5 replies
0 recast
4 reactions
Joe Petrich 🟪
@jpetrich
It's a lot cheaper if you don't need high availability, but yeah it's expensive.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Lemma
@lemma
I liked planetscale.com for a side project. Would probably use it for production use in the future.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Andrei O.
@andrei0x309
In 2014 when cloud computing started to take shape I did a paper during my masters and predicted this, for some reason I remember this because the teacher went out of his way to talk about the paper. Deliver cheaper prices than on-premise at first then using market capture increase the cost far beyond on-premise.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Leeward Bound
@leewardbound
GCP and AWS have WILD prices, first for the vps themselves, then doubly such for every "hosted service" that they provision on it. We have like half a dozen small workloads for different clients that each use a $80 absolute-bare-minimum instance on GCP, but I started to run sql inside k8s for cost savings sometimes.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Antoine
@antoinedc
Yeah gcp is way too expensive for dbs. Take a look at fly.io, less managed but more reasonably priced. I migrated there from gcp
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
