Someone, probably: People who don't know how their services work are doomed to spend lots of money on them.
From the GCS pricing page:
Network egress within Google Cloud applies when you move or copy data from one bucket in Cloud Storage to another or when another Google Cloud service accesses data in your bucket.
Within the same location (for example, US-EAST1 to US-EAST1 or EU to EU) -- Free
From the original tweet (not the linked reply):
For reference most of the fees are from transferring from NA to EU and ACAP
It's costing them assloads of money because they're moving data between regions. AWS works the same way. Azure is probably also the same but their pricing page is incomprehensible so who knows.
Lesson: if you're going to use data in a given location, you need to host data in the same location.
I checked a while ago and IBM Cloud costed the same price down to the dollar.
IBM bills by the network interface, hundreds of dollars per months to get a dual bonded NIC for private and public transfer. If you use the bandwidth close to capacity all day long for he whole month, it ends up the same cost as you would pay on Amazon for transferring that amount of GB.
So be more constructive, I'd like to learn more about IBM Cloud as I have no experience with it. Is there a Lambda-like service, pay-by-use 'serverless' database hosting, and support for direct client-to-DB connections with RLS/ACLs?
Are you looking for something inside IBM cloud? If not, FaunaDB might be interesting? It's a serverless database, pay as you go (with free tier), security layer for client to DB connections, strongly consistent, scalable and distributed (multiple regions). Disclaimer: I work for them.
I looked it up, and I do like it. Thanks for the reference. But, there's one big thing missing and that is the DB needs to be open sourced. Do that and I'll move my projects to your hosted service and promote it everywhere I possibly can.
But, it needs to be open source. Otherwise I'd rather stick with AWS Cognito + Dynamo/AppSync, because primarily that I can depend that it'll be around in five years. Even if I believe FaunaDB cloud will around, I know I won't be able to convince my other stakeholders. But, if it's open source, I can always argue that if FaunaDB-as-a-service disapears, I can host it myself (as a last resort).
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
Hard to say their cloud "sucks" when they offer a solution featuring the very thing being complained about in regards to other cloud services. Or maybe IBM's cloud really is terrible, but it would be hard to know that as an outsider since you failed to provide any substantiating info. If you could expand upon your initial assertion, that would surely help the rest of us see your point and assist you in proving your case.
The gcs bucket just needs to be set to region? See documentation:-
Data egress from your bucket to a non-Cloud Storage Google Cloud service is free in the following cases:
Your bucket is located in a region, the Google Cloud service is located in a multi-region, and both locations are on the same continent. For example, accessing data in a US-EAST1 bucket with a US App Engine instance.
Your bucket is located in a multi-region, the Google Cloud service is located in a region, and both locations are on the same continent. For example, accessing data in an EU bucket with an EU-WEST1 GKE instance.
EDIT 2:
the cloud ai documentation suggests the correct setting is regional/regional
From the GCS pricing page:
From the original tweet (not the linked reply): It's costing them assloads of money because they're moving data between regions. AWS works the same way. Azure is probably also the same but their pricing page is incomprehensible so who knows.Lesson: if you're going to use data in a given location, you need to host data in the same location.