> Cloud challenges can be as or more complex than bare metal ones.
Big +1 to this. For what I thought was a modest sized project it feels like an np-hard problem coordinating with gcloud account reps to figure out what regions have both enough hyperdisk capacity and compute capacity. A far cry from being able to just "download more ram" with ease.
The cloud ain't magic folks, it's just someone else's servers.
(All that said... still way easier than if I needed to procure our own hardware and colocate it. The project is complete. Just delayed more than I expected.)
> The cloud ain't magic folks, it's just someone else's servers.
The cloud is where the entire responsibility for those servers lives elsewhere.
If you're going to run a VM, sure. But when you're running a managed db with some managed compute, the cost for that might be high in comparison. But you just offloaded the whole infra management responsibility. That's their value add
But any serious deployment of "cloud" infrastructure still needs management, you're just forcing the people doing it to use the small number of knobs the cloud provider makes available rather than giving them full access to the software itself.
not sure what you mean by a serious deployment, but a lot of companies will be perfectly fine with, some compute, object storage and a managed rdbms.
Will that be more expensive than running it yourself? Absolutely. Does it allow teams to function and deliver independently, yes. As an org, you can prioritize cost or something else.
Big +1 to this. For what I thought was a modest sized project it feels like an np-hard problem coordinating with gcloud account reps to figure out what regions have both enough hyperdisk capacity and compute capacity. A far cry from being able to just "download more ram" with ease.
The cloud ain't magic folks, it's just someone else's servers.
(All that said... still way easier than if I needed to procure our own hardware and colocate it. The project is complete. Just delayed more than I expected.)