_______ __ _______
| | |.---.-..----.| |--..-----..----. | | |.-----..--.--.--..-----.
| || _ || __|| < | -__|| _| | || -__|| | | ||__ --|
|___|___||___._||____||__|__||_____||__| |__|____||_____||________||_____|
on Gopher (inofficial)
(HTM) Visit Hacker News on the Web
COMMENT PAGE FOR:
(HTM) Indexing 100M vectors in 20 minutes on PostgreSQL with 12GB RAM
q3k wrote 18 hours 26 min ago:
> $272 monthly + GPU cost
Imagine paying $250+/mo for 32GB of RAM and 4 VCPUs. No wonder Amazon
is swimming in cash, the markup on this is bonkers.
paulddraper wrote 13 hours 0 min ago:
+ 3.75 TB NVMe
And thatâs the per second pricing applied 24/7 for a month. A year
commitment takes 30% off.
Still a big markup, but a lot of these comparisons are the the on
demand instant on/off price.
anko wrote 17 hours 35 min ago:
100% this, i've been finding metal is getting very compelling against
aws. For example latitude has 4 real cores and 32 GB of ram for
$92/month. [1] hetzner doesn't even have specs this low from what i
can tell!
(HTM) [1]: https://www.latitude.sh/pricing/c2-small-x86?gen=gen-2
(HTM) [2]: https://www.hetzner.com/dedicated-rootserver/#cores_threads_...
q3k wrote 17 hours 22 min ago:
It has a VM with 32GB RAM and 4x the cores for 1/10th of the price:
25eur/mo. Effectively even lower because it has 20TB of included
traffic, and the overage cost for it is ~1/10th of the AWS egress
cost.
Or, for 184eur/mo you can get one of their bare metal GPU offerings
with 64GB of RAM, a i5-13500 and an RTX4000.
esafak wrote 23 hours 51 min ago:
How does it compare with paradedb and lancedb?
ayende wrote 1 day ago:
That suffer from a serious issue
You must have the data upfront, you cannot build this in an incremental
fashion
There is also bo mention on how this would handle updates, and from the
description, even if updates are possible, this will degrade over time,
requiring new indexing batch
nwellinghoff wrote 5 days ago:
Too bad aws does not support any of these other vector extensions in
managed rds.
duckbot3000 wrote 5 days ago:
Kinda makes you wonder why you need cloud for anything besides remote
encrypted backups if you can run all that on 12GB
Nextgrid wrote 9 hours 22 min ago:
You don't, but business executives aren't the kind to easily admit
they got conned - and if they're getting close to that stage, a nice
dinner or golfing session paid by the vendor's representative
generally alleviates those feelings very well.
Engineers who started their career during the cloud craze and don't
know anything else are also not the kind to rock the boat, lest the
cash cow dies and their whole "investment" in their career becomes
useless.
riku_iki wrote 4 days ago:
what about failover story if server dies? PG failover setup is
complicated, and cloud infra handles this for you.
benjiro wrote 22 hours 3 min ago:
[1] ... when its complete. From the guy that made Vitess for
Mysql.
And yes, i agree, the PG failover setup (and especially dealing
with a failure afterwards, to restore the ex-master is beyond
infuriating).
But its not pay 10x the amount, while eating easily 10x performance
infuriating :)
(HTM) [1]: https://github.com/multigres/multigres
tjwebbnorfolk wrote 22 hours 23 min ago:
What are you willing to pay for cloud-native failover?
Not every use case requires 100% uptime
riku_iki wrote 20 hours 56 min ago:
Sure, but those who require (99% of major businesses) are ready
to pay.
Nextgrid wrote 9 hours 29 min ago:
Is that why most of them go down every time a single provider
or even region goes down?
Actual active-active HA of your datastores is really hard to do
(CAP theorem and all that). The majority of companies don't do
it.
riku_iki wrote 2 hours 3 min ago:
PG doesn't have active-active.
Solution is to have multizone failover with replication.
logifail wrote 23 hours 6 min ago:
(Genuine question) What's your current plan for when your cloud
provider goes offline? Do you have a failover story, or it a
case of "wait for them to come back online"?
riku_iki wrote 20 hours 56 min ago:
I have backups on different cloud provider, so I could bootstrap
db if provider goes dark indefinitely.
But realistically, I believe major clouds (google, aws) likely
has more robust org and infra for recovery than I can built and
maintain.
positron26 wrote 1 day ago:
Do we mean managed or PG on K8s like CNPG? In all cases, I use the
infra to simplify things like having disk redundancy and failover
nodes, not because 12GB is interesting.
riku_iki wrote 1 day ago:
Primary managed PG, since you still need
setup/maintenance/monitoring on your K8S own solution.
positron26 wrote 16 hours 29 min ago:
You guys are doing monitoring? ;-)
setr wrote 5 days ago:
Because getting any hardware out of infra-team on premise is utterly
miserable, across the board.
lelanthran wrote 1 day ago:
That's not the only alternative.
Rent your VPS and add in extra volumes for like $10 per 100GB.
Imustaskforhelp wrote 22 hours 11 min ago:
Funny thing but netcup has $10 per 1 TB
Netcup is under-rated but there are also other providers too at
lowendbox/lowendtalk and I am interested to try out hetzner too
sometime.
lelanthran wrote 16 hours 22 min ago:
> Funny thing but netcup has $10 per 1 TB
Nice to know, but I was just guessing at what a reasonable
price would be :-)
benjiro wrote 21 hours 58 min ago:
And if you want to go even cheaper, check out Hetzner their
EX63 (go to custom) > 4x 7.68TB drives for like 140 Euro.
Not counting the fact that Netcup is raided (also Netcup is
limited to 8TB on a VPS).
That is like 4.7 Euro /TB. That is like 4$/TB. 6 Euro / TB in a
raid 5 setup.
I do not understand why they are not using this new pricing
model on their older servers. There the best you can get is
like 10 Euro /TB (for the single 15TB U.2).
(DIR) <- back to front page