Not providing a cap on spending is a major flaw of GCP for individuals / small projects.

With Cloud Run, AFAIK, spending can effectively be capped by: limiting concurrency, plus limiting the max number of instances it can scale to. (But this is not as good as GCP having a proper cap.)

I dunno, the scale to zero and pay per second features seemed super useful to me after forgetting to shut down some training instances with AWS. Also the fast startup ability, if it actually works as well as they say, would be amazing for a lot of the type of workloads that I have.

You can set max instances in Cloud Run, which is an effective limit on how much you'll spend.

Also, hard dollar caps are rarely if ever the right choice. App Engine used to have these, and the practical effect was that your website would completely stop working exactly when you least want it to (posted on HN etc).

It's better to set billing alerts and make the call yourself if they go off.

I've abandoned DataDog in production for just this reason. Is the amount of money they make on dinging people who screw up really worth the ill-will and people who decide they're just not going to start projects on these platforms?

I never used modal or vast.ai and from their pages it was not obvious how they solve the yolo billing issue? Are they pre-paid or do they support caps?

> uncapped yolo billing

This made me laugh out loud, thank you for this!

thats what billing limits are for

Runpod is pretty great. I wrote some genetic end point script that I can deploy in seconds, download the models to the pod, and Im ready to go. Plus I forgot and left a pod running, but down, for a week and it was like 0.60, and they emailed me like 3 times reminding me of the pod.

Cloud Run is great but no billing limits is too scary. No idea why they don't address this. They must know if they support individuals we'll eventually leave our saases there.