logoalt Hacker News

pjeremtoday at 12:24 PM1 replyview on HN

Except 95% of companies have no need of ultra scalable super cloud.

If you are a very big SaaS company that is not Google or Apple, you are probably serving hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of unique users. AWS may be convenient, but you don't /need/ it, you can build an infrastructure that will handle such workload with any of the big european providers.

You'll just lose in comfort what you'll gain in data sovereignty and infrastructure costs.

I worked for a 7M€ MRR company that had maybe a million of users who used the software every day. The thing ran on a dozen of OVH servers, including multi-site redundancy.


Replies

omnimustoday at 2:00 PM

Exactly. AWS proposition was much more alluring where compute was more expensive and it required yearly estimations and updates.

In times when one physical server can have 32, 64 or even 96 cores... you pack your own little datacenter right there and it's pretty cheap to simply overkill it, have one or two servers for redundancy and bye.

So many businesses will happily run from 4 core 10usd VPS (that would have been beefy server 20 years ago).