by anglinb on 11/6/21, 6:25 PM with 199 comments
by nrmitchi on 11/6/21, 8:25 PM
In no sane version of the world should "not adding a db index" lead to getting a 50x bill at the end of the month without knowing.
I am a strong believer that services that are based on "scale infinitly" really need hard budget controls, and slower-scaling (unless explicitly overidden/allowed, of course).
If I accidently push very non-performant code, I kind of expect my service to get less performant, quickly realize the problem, and fix it. I don't expect a service to seemingly-magically detect my poor code, increase my bill by a couple orders-of-magnitude, and only alert me hours (if not days) later.
by Grimm1 on 11/6/21, 7:18 PM
In fact it's like a big bullet point near the top of the docs page.
"MySQL requires indexes on foreign keys and referenced keys so that foreign key checks can be fast and not require a table scan. In the referencing table, there must be an index where the foreign key columns are listed as the first columns in the same order. Such an index is created on the referencing table automatically if it does not exist. This index might be silently dropped later if you create another index that can be used to enforce the foreign key constraint. index_name, if given, is used as described previously."
I'm not entirely sure why buzz around "developer learns basic knowledge" has this on the front page.
by samlambert on 11/6/21, 7:19 PM
It’s core to our mission that our product’s pricing is accessible and friendly to small teams. Part of being in beta was us wanting to figure out the best pricing based on usage patterns. That work is nearly done. As the post mentions we’ve credited back the amount.
by xupybd on 11/6/21, 7:12 PM
Having the database constrained as much as possible makes maintenance so much easier. Many bugs don't escape into production as they're caught by the database constraints. Those that do get out do less damage to the data.
I know scale comes with trade offs but that seems extreme to me.
by hodgesrm on 11/6/21, 11:31 PM
It's not a newfangled serverless pricing model, but it's something I can reason about as a multi-decade developer of database apps. I feel comfortable that our users--mostly devs--feel the same way. We work to help people optimize the compute and storage down to the lowest levels that meet their SLAs. The most important property of the model is that costs are capped.
One of the things that I hear a lot from users of products like BigQuery is that they get nailed on consumption costs that they can't relate in a meaningful way to application behavior. There's a lot of innovation around SaaS pricing for data services but I'm still not convinced that the more abstract models really help users. We ourselves get nailed by "weird shit" expenses like use cases that hammer Zookeeper in bad ways across availability zones. We eat them because we don't think users should need to understand internals to figure out costs. The best SaaS services abstract away operational details and have a simple billing model that doesn't break when something unexpected happens on your apps.
Would love to hear alternative view points. It's not an easy problem.
by radu_floricica on 11/6/21, 7:58 PM
https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/ax161/configura...
Draw that nice red slide all the way to the right. No, it's not storage. Yeah, it's actually affordable. Yeah, that was a sexual sound you just made.
You do have to be prepared to know some basic sysadmin, or pay somebody to do it for you. My newest server has about 60 cores and half a tera of ram. Surprisingly, it's not uber sharp - I went with high core count so individual queries actually got slower for about 20%. But that load... you can't even tell if the cpu load gauge is working. I can't wait to fill it up :D Maybe this black friday season I'll get it to 10%.
by foreigner on 11/6/21, 7:40 PM
AFAIK AWS doesn't have that. They do have the ability to send me alerts if my bill is unexpectedly high, but they still keep working until I go bankrupt. It's possible to use those alerts to implement your own "broke man's switch", but they don't have it built in.
by dreyfan on 11/6/21, 7:22 PM
by fabian2k on 11/6/21, 7:47 PM
It also seems very expensive compared to just renting DBs by instance, if you put any real load onto this. I can see this being attractive if your use case only queries single rows by key, but it's essentially a big minefield for any query more complex than that. A database with a rather opaque query planner doesn't seem like a good fit for this kind of pricing.
by bigbillheck on 11/6/21, 7:09 PM
by j3th9n on 11/7/21, 8:32 AM
by rabuse on 11/6/21, 7:00 PM
by AnotherGoodName on 11/6/21, 7:18 PM
by XCSme on 11/6/21, 7:52 PM
by NicoJuicy on 11/6/21, 6:52 PM
by mekster on 11/7/21, 11:42 AM
That is such a bad habit like everyone getting on git and getting burned and now it's irreversible with all the existing ecosystem.
How hard is it to just spin up a beefy cloud instance and run a MySQL of your own with whatever backup strategy you got and do things the way it is than getting bitten by using stuff you're not even familiar with.
by smoldesu on 11/6/21, 6:53 PM
by racl101 on 11/6/21, 10:37 PM
Then a bro showed me one night about the magic of indexes. 5 minutes worth of advice saved me hundreds of dollars per month in the future and all he asked in return was for some beer and chicken wings.
Now that is a good bro.
I'm happy to say I've paid it forward myself.
by Aeolun on 11/6/21, 11:27 PM
by revskill on 11/6/21, 9:39 PM
Imagine how many wasted $$$ they earned based on common knowledge that they should prevent for customers instead.
by crorella on 11/6/21, 9:13 PM
by bborud on 11/7/21, 10:50 AM
by max_hammer on 11/6/21, 10:36 PM
My company in boarded `fivetran` to source data from different tools.
Budget got exhausted in sourcing `iterable` data
by ihusasmiiu on 11/6/21, 8:00 PM
by arpa on 11/6/21, 8:07 PM
by smsm42 on 11/7/21, 6:57 AM
Interestingly enough, some DBs (like Cassandra) would refuse scan-type queries unless specifically asked to. I wonder if cloud-based DBs which charge per row inspected could have such mode... Though of course it's their incentive not to.
by sushsjsuauahab on 11/6/21, 7:56 PM