- #Aws postgresql 12 how to
- #Aws postgresql 12 upgrade
- #Aws postgresql 12 software
- #Aws postgresql 12 plus
Name to use when displaying the plan in the Marketplace. This is storage volume size for service instance, which is 5–4096 GB.ĭeprecated - Minimum number of cores for the service instance. Can be any supported major or minor version. Whether the plan supports upgrading, downgrading, or sidegrading to another version. Specifies whether service instances of the service plan can bind to applications. When false, service instances of this service plan have a cost. The following table lists parameters which can only be configured for additional plans: Parameter Name
#Aws postgresql 12 how to
For instructions on how to configure plans, see Configure Services with Cloud Service Broker for AWS. When configuring Cloud Service Broker for AWS you can add additional plans.
#Aws postgresql 12 upgrade
For more information about upgrade steps, see Upgrading. If you have instances of the RDS for PostgreSQL that were created in previous versions that you want to maintain, see Previously Provided Pre-configured Plans. All plans must be configured through the tile. Note: Release v1.2.0 removed brokerpak pre-configured plans for Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL. It details the plan and service instance configuration parameters, and binding credentials. In fact I already use Cloudflare for those areas where it makes sense - shaves off around 100TB.This topic provides reference information about the Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL (csb-aws-postgresql) service.
Meanwhile I can buy dedicated servers with 1Gbps dedicated and unmetered bandwidth for 60-70 bucks/month nowadays, and I won't have to worry about paying a dollar more - and certainly not thousands of dollars.Īnd no it's not the kind of traffic you can just run through a CDN. Last I checked it was easily north of $20,000 even with their volume discounts. Look up what 500TB-1000TB of egress traffic would cost me on AWS. The egress traffic alone would cost me that much.
>I still can't begin to imagine what your app is doing that it could possibly cost you $20,000/month. Those $500 include everything from domains to backups, to various back- and front-end VPS. That's not even a close to the specs of the dedicated servers I am using, nor is the site "just" those four servers. If this was a static site I could run it for free. > If this is a static site, 2 million monthly visitors on AWS would cost less than $5. > Which VPS provider are you talking about specifically?
#Aws postgresql 12 software
The layers of software on top of the (virtual) hardware are free. > Instead I run it on 4 dedicated servers and a bunch of VPS, costing me around $500/month all-in-all.įour medium EC2 instances also cost ~$500/month all-in, so you're seemingly saving nothing. It doesn't sound like you have a sense of what AWS costs, even within an order of magnitude. That would buy you a huge fleet of servers (something like 200 mid-to-large EC2 instances). If it's a non-static site and none of those 2 million visits are cached, I still can't begin to imagine what your app is doing that it could possibly cost you $20,000/month. If this is a static site, 2 million monthly visitors on AWS would cost less than $5. On AWS it would cost me $20,000/month on traffic alone. > I run a site with roughly 2 million monthly visitors. I'm saving money by transferring unpredictable salary costs into predictable server costs.
#Aws postgresql 12 plus
> Plus what is the point of scaling when you're losing money at any scale? Which VPS provider are you talking about specifically? > Most VPS providers tick most of the boxes on your list, so I'm not sure what you're on about. The modern cloud is amazing and a constant source of joy for someone like me, who has been doing web software for more than 20 years. I can't imagine why anyone would DIY this stuff if they're working with any kind of budget at all.Īt the moment, I have an insurance company with hundreds of thousands of customers running on ~$1,000/mo. and that's probably not even a complete list.Įvery VPS-like database management experience I've ever had has caused me a lot of lost sleep. It's absolutely amazing not to have to worry about: $100/month for something I could do with VPS is an amazing bargain if it saves me even 2 hours of dev time every month.Īs someone who used to maintain servers and databases first on dedicated hardware, then on colo servers, and later on vanilla EC2, I am so thankful for RDS.
This comes up on every AWS-related comment section. Sure, going to $50 won't matter to most wallets, but at around $100 you're just getting ripped off and someone is having a laugh at your expense.
0 kommentar(er)
