On 2024-07-08 18:28:23 +0000, Vincent Legoll wrote: > Hello, > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2024 at 3:47 PM Vagrant Cascadian wrote: > > > This may be a little wild, but what are the downsides to doing some > > combination of all of the above? > > > > A mixed strategy could reduce ... the upfront cost of buying and hosting > > hardware (#1), the ongoing costs of renting (#2), and dependence on the > > generosity of a third party for sponsored hardware & hosting (#3). > > > > It seems like any strategy should have some redundancy (e.g. multiple > > independent build farms) so that a failure in one datacenter does not > > effectively take down the whole network... > > > > That would be my opinion too. > > But for the cloud renting I would first research if there are associated > network or other costs, Yes, there are other costs. You in general pay for the egress used. I have no idea how much traffic does our current farm use. I will speak of AWS, because that is the one I know, but other will be likely similar. If we would have setup just in one "Availability Zone" (think data center), traffic between VMs is free. Traffic to the internet however is not. First 100 GB is free each month, and after that (source [0]): First 10 TB / Month $0.09 per GB Next 40 TB / Month $0.09 per GB Next 100 TB / Month $0.07 per GB Greater than 150 TB / Month $0.05 per GB The prices differ by region a bit, but Europe and US are the "cheap" ones. Interesting point is that someone can just decide to download a lot from you, and *you* would pay for it. It is nice way to drive up bill of someone you do not like. You also pay for storage and various other things. Doing cost estimates in the cloud is hard, because everything is complex and there are lot of options to spend on. Than there also is the "moral" side of the clouds. > because the computing is cheap only to lure you into the (sometimes > prohibitive) hidden costs. Even the computing is not cheap by itself, if you just want compute, Hetzner is cheaper. Clouds give the nice things on top, like storage snapshots, backups, ... (ignoring the cost). But, at least in my experience, not cost saving, unless you radically re-design your application/stack to match the cloud providers infrastructure. Naive "lift and shift" migrations to the cloud can have tangible benefits, but cost saving is rarely one of them. Now, this all describes just actual "clouds". Hetzner, for example, does not charge for traffic (with some exceptions[1]). You pay 2 EUR for public IPv4, but other than that, I did not notice any unexpected charges on my invoices. I personally think that renting actual physical servers might be a reasonable idea. One issue to consider is that (Hetzner in particular) has a history of MitM attacks against their customers (assumption is that it was due to court order, but it was never confirmed AFAIK). So I would expect physical compromise (signing keys) to be possible as well. I have no idea how that would compare to the security in the current hosting. Have a nice day, Tomas 0: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/cloud/what-is-aws-data-transfer-pricing/ 1: https://docs.hetzner.com/robot/general/traffic/ -- There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation, naming things and off-by-one errors.