The conversation

DemiurgeHNSource author
Business & incomeExperience excerpt · English

I think it’s the other way around

I think it’s the other way around. I’m a huge fan of Hetzner for small sites with a few users. However, for bigger projects, the cloud seems to offer a complete lack of constraints. For projects that can pay for my time, $200/m or $2000/m in hosting costs is a negligible difference. What’s the development cost difference between AWS CDK / Terraform + GitHub Actions vs. Docker / K8s / Ansible + any CI pipeline? I don’t know; in my experience, I don’t see how “bare metal” saves much engineering time. I also don’t see anything complicated about using an IaC Fargate + RDS template. Now, if you actually need to decouple your file storage and make it durable and scalable, or need to dynamically create subdomains, or any number of other things… The effort of learning and integrating different dedicated services at the infrastructure level to run all this seems much more constraining. I’ve been doing this since before the “Cloud,” and in my view, if you have a project that makes money, cloud costs are a worthwhile investment that will be the last thing that constrains your project. …

Original discussionUse One Big Server (2022)323 source comments · at import
2

What was this responding to?

Parent context · original excerpt

RU
runakoHN

One of the more detrimental aspects of the Cloud Tax is that it constrains the types of solutions engineers even consider. Picking an arbitrary price point of $200/mo, you can get 4(!) vCPUs and 16GB of RAM at AWS. Architectures are different etc., but this is roughly a mid-spec dev laptop of 5 or so years ago. At Hetzner, you can rent a machine with 48 cores and 128GB of RAM for the same money. It's hard to overstate how far apart these machines are in raw computational capacity. There are approaches to problems that make sense with 10x the capacity that don't make sense on the much smaller node. Critically, those approaches can sometimes save engineering time that would otherwise go into building a more complex system to manage around artificial constraints. Yes, there are other factors like durability etc. that need to be designed for. But going the other way, dedicated boxes can deli…

Full original

Community replies 0

No community replies yet. Add your perspective.

Replies from the source 2

Direct replies available in this import. Original-language excerpts.

RU
runakoHN

> I really don't see how "bare metal" saves any engineering time This is because you are looking only at provisioning/deployment. And you are right -- node size does not impact DevOps all that much. I am looking at the solution space available to the engineers who write the software that ultimately gets deployed on the nodes. And that solution space is different when the nodes have 10x the capability. Yes, cloud providers have tons of aggregate capability. But designing software to run on a fleet of small machines is very different from accomplishing the same tasks on a single large machine. It would not be controversial to suggest that targeting code at an Apple Watch or Raspberry Pi imposes constraints on developers that do not exist when targeting desktops. I am saying the same dynamic now applies to targeting cloud providers. This isn't to say there's a single best solution for every…

Full original
BE
benterixHN

> I’m a huge fan of Hetzner ... I don’t see how “bare metal” saves much engineering time. I think you confuse Heztner with bare metal. Hetzner has Hetzner Cloud which is like AWS EC2 but much cheaper. (They also have bare metal servers which are even cheaper.) With Heztner Cloud, you can use Terraform, Github Actions and whatever else you mentioned.

Full original
Continue on Hacker News

Respect different perspectives. Share concrete experiences.

Sign in to post, reply, repost, and quote.