I have the dubious honor of leading a migration from an on-premise managed colocation facility into AWS. It was necessary to help the business succeed, but frankly I would rather not have needed to do it. Earlier this morning I saw a post about ‘leaving the cloud” by that attention-seeking guy who keeps trying to keynote RailsConf, I had some opinions. I was hopped up on caffeine and free office snacks, and just could not help but share my thoughts in the fediverse.
Long story short, I think the original author’s analysis is nonsense and will most likely result in him Musking his own company. Either way, here are some thoughts saved for posterity:
I have always disliked this dude’s simpleton analyses but IF you are considering leaving AWS (or other cloud providers) you must include:
- Operational cost: which is all that the original author’s analysis includes.
- Labor cost: migrations use people’s time, which is typically the biggest portion of a company’s budget.
- Opportunity cost: managing infrastructure or migrating it means you’re not investing in growing the business. If your business isn’t about running infrastructure (e.g. CloudFlare, Fastly, etc), this typically means you’re actively harming your business by focusing elsewhere.
But there’s so much more!
IF the business’ workloads are CPU intensive and consistent, buying metal might be cheaper.
Otherwise, if your math shows that on-premise is cheaper than I would have questions about the current infrastructure, are you using:
- ECS/Fargate is crazy cheap and works great for almost all web apps you can shove into a container.
- AWS Aurora is crazy good and makes a lot of RDMS work and scaling easy.
- AWS Savings Plans help further reduce costs for predictable compute.
IF the business already has a big investment into AWS S3, I hope you’re planning to get punished with S3 egress costs.
S3 is a modern marvel as Corey Quinn has said. You literally cannot make faster, cheaper, or more resilient storage But AWS uses cost to encourage you not to walk away from S3.
Depending on the relation of the application to the S3 storage, transit fees can eat you alive.
IF the business’ SLAs allow for the risk of a single-site on-premise deployment, that’s coo.
AWS can have downtimes but it can be enlightening to ask the ops old guard about the time suck of configuration management, rack management, or dealing with RMAs with shitty hardware vendors.
I don’t relish funding Jeff Bezos’ next super yacht any more than you do, but the stack you can get on AWS is unrivaled in its cost, reliability, and ease of use.
Nobody gives AWS enough credit for their security work.
Building secure infrastructure is really challenging. There’s patch management, role-based access control systems, data encryption needs, certificates, all sorts of things.
Not all clouds do it well (lol azure).
But walking away from VPCs, Security Groups (Network Isolation), IAM (Role-based access controls), CloudTrail (audit logging), GuardDuty (intrusion detection), and automated upgrades for managed services would have me very seriously questioning what security posture the org may or may not have.
Anyways, I don’t love AWS. It’s a monoculture and it makes an ugly anti-competitive business viable.
It’s still the right choice in my opinion for the vast majority of businesses.