Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
I am preparing for an AWS certificate so I am reading about AWS services. The security section states there are both AWS Trusted Advisor and AWS Inspector, however, I couldn't understand the difference between them.
What is the difference between AWS Trusted Advisor and AWS Inspector?
Trusted Advisor provides advice about your AWS Account in the areas of:
Cost Optimization
Fault Tolerance
Performance
Service Limits
Security
It highlights potential problems with the way you use AWS.
Amazon Inspector checks the configuration of EC2 instances. An agent runs on EC2 instances and checks operating system patches, known vulnerabilities, and common issues.
Therefore, the difference is:
Trusted Advisor applies to the AWS account and AWS services
Amazon Inspector applies to the content of multiple EC2 instances
AWS Inspector
AWS Trusted Advisor
Agent-based
Agent-less
No impact on performance
Improves performance by checking service limit
Free tier
Premium support
EC2 configuration
AWS account & administrations
No cost recommendations
Recommendations to optimize cost
Scheduled
Real time guidance
No impact on performance
Improves performance by checking service limit
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 5 days ago.
Improve this question
I have a customer who already has a Production workload running in AWS, and they are exploring DR options. They have a bit of on-prem infrastructure available and were wondering if they could use their on-prem data center as their DR environment for AWS. In searching through the docs, or Googling a solution, everything that is returned is the more typical use case of running production on-prem and DR in AWS. Has anyone seen this reverse setup, and if so, what was the approach?
I would recommend against this approach.
Due to the elastic nature of cloud compute, it is possible to deploy Disaster Recovery systems in the cloud when required, without having them running all the time. This is a different approach to traditional on-premises DR where equipment is sitting unused "just in case" it is required.
This also means that a DR system can be deployed in the cloud that is identical to Production, whereas attempting to deploy on "a bit of on-prem infrastructure" would be quite complex because it would not be identical to Production.
If your customer deployed to AWS using "Infrastructure as a Service" (eg using CloudFormation or Terraform), then deploying the DR system would be as simple as running a script.
An alternative approach to Disaster Recovery is not to fail-over, but instead always run systems in parallel. For example, instead of two web servers running in one Availability Zone, run one web server in each of two different Availability Zones. A Load Balancer would be able to direct traffic to both web servers. If one Availability Zone was to experience a disaster, the web server and load balancer running in the other Availability Zone would continue to operate. This approach is "High Availability" as opposed to Disaster Recovery. Under such an architecture, the system can keep operating even when suffering failures, as opposed to having to "fail-over" to an alternative site. Plus, it avoids having to "fail-back" to the original site, which is typically the hardest part of it all.
An analogy: High Availability is a bit like having two small trucks instead of one large truck -- work can continue even if one truck fails, and another truck can be 'launched' relatively quickly. In contrast, Disaster Recovery would react to a broken truck by pulling a horse out of the stable.
For more information, see: Disaster recovery options in the cloud - Disaster Recovery of Workloads on AWS: Recovery in the Cloud
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
I'm being charged for "E2 Instance Core running in Seoul". The billing report says the related service is "Compute Engine", but there is no VM instance running from Compute Engine. I can't track the cause of the bill.
Not sure if it's related, but I created 4 Cloud Run services with 0 minimum instances auto-scaling settings and runs probably 0~5 mins per day. But the usage of the "E2 Instance Core running in Seoul" is 84 hours for 7 days. So I don't think that's the cause.
Why am I being charged for "E2 Instance Core running in Seoul"?
As confirmed in the comments, when using a VPC Serverless Connector, this connector is charged as e2-micro instances as stated by pricing docs.
This is the reason why you see these charges even if you're not having a VM in GCE.
Also to confirm, you can use the following tip from the docs:
You can view your Serverless VPC Access costs in the Cloud Console by filtering your billing reports by the label key serverless-vpc-access.
There are two possiblities:
Resources were created in the wrong region due to a bug - contact billing support and explain everything. If they confirm that it's a bug you can file it on IssueTracker.
Your account has been compromised - in this case I can recommend reading some documentation:
Compromised credentials
Identify and secure compromised accounts
Check the login audit log and see for any unathorised / suspicious looking logins and audit logs for entries related to the resources located in Seoul. It may be in a different project (which would support "being hacked" version).
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I need a place to host a small basic static web site made up of a bunch of file and folders (html, css, images, etc.) for a non-profit. I've looked at Amazon AWS a bit and it looks like it could be done for a very small cost.
Is it really possible to host a web site At Amazon AWS for under a $1.00/month?
Is there any way to use the free AWS and then determine what the cost would have been if one used the paid option?
Is it really possible to host a web site At Amazon AWS for under a
$1.00/month?
If you just have static files, then you can definitely host the site on S3 for a very low price. If you have a dynamic website (PHP, Ruby, Python, Java, etc.) then you will need an actual server to run that on, and it will be more like $5 a month minimum.
Note that you will pay for data transfer, so if your site gets very popular the price could start to go up.
Is there any way to use the free AWS and then determine what the cost
would have been if one used the paid option?
You can enable detailed billing on the AWS account. Then you could punch those numbers into the AWS cost calculator to see what the charges would have been if you were not in your free tier period.
Is it really possible to host a web site At Amazon AWS for under a
$1.00/month?
It is possible for 1$/Month in AWS but your usage and traffic has to be less. Free tier is available but it is available for one year only and following are the resources available in free tier https://aws.amazon.com/free/.
You can also refer this which gives approximation. http://www.hostingadvice.com/how-to/aws-s3-pricing/
Is there any way to use the free AWS and then determine what the cost
would have been if one used the paid option?
You can calculate this cost at https://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html
Also you stated in your question it is non-profit. So AWS provides $2000 credits for non-profits.
https://aws.amazon.com/government-education/nonprofits/
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to create an iOS app for 1:1 and group chats. Since DynamoDB is not the ideal solution for this, I am currently searching for a better way.
Possible solutions:
Install an XMPP server (eJabbered) on AWS EC2
Use AWS RDS (relational database) with one chat table, where each record equals a message sent from one client to another or to a group.
Use Amazon S3 to store files for each chat?
Other options?
Which one of the above is most elegant / easiest solution for this?
Option 1 is not recommended by some. Option 2 seems to be easier to (auto) scale.
Which one is more cost-efficient?
Regarding RDS Amazon writes:
"AWS Free Tier includes 750hrs of Micro DB Instance each month for one year"
Regarding EC2 Amazon writes:
"AWS Free Tier includes 750 hours of Linux and Windows t2.micro instances each month for one year. To stay within the Free Tier, use only EC2 Micro instances."
I am quite new to server backend architecture, but an accounting based on time seems not to be the best solution for a chat app?
The S3 solution is not the one to choose because the limit of PUT Authorized on Amazon S3 is too small (2000), so if you are going to have millions of chat conversation, your cost will be amazing.
Currently i'm using AWS RDS for a chat feature on my android/ios application.
This solution works fine because my database and your server application are scalable, but i'm not sure it's the better solution to use.
Conclusion
If i have to start a new chat application today, i will choose XMPP server for low cost and better performance.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm planning to move my Website which is using multiple wordpress to Amazon Services. However, my daily vistors are about 22,000 and sometimes goes to over 90k and the web crashes! However, the hosting company charge me nearly $100 including support without support it would cost $50. the average bandwidth is about 400GB.
Can I ask please how much will it cost me? and how I can start with Amazon Services?
Kind regards
Start out by looking at the different types of hosting that Amazon offers and which one will be the correct fit for your site. Amazon's EC2 (Elastic Cloud Computing) is the servers that you can get hosted in the cloud.
Depending on how much storage space and bandwidth, the costs differ. They have a helpful cost guide on their EC2 page. They offer different pricing for the different types of servers you need. They have on demand spot instances which can be brought up and down on the fly. If you need a server to be running constantly you can put a down payment and have a reserved instance to provide the server.
You can calculate your fees depending on your current usage from the tools AWS provides. http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html
This is also a good article for getting started with using WordPress under AWS.
http://wp.tutsplus.com/tutorials/scaling-caching/deploy-your-wordpress-blog-to-the-cloud/
AWS also provides a Free Tier of services provided you stay under a certain amount of usage. That is detailed at http://aws.amazon.com/free/ . I also found this YouTube video on setting up EC2 instances very helpful. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPFoDnjR8e8 . From what I understand, unless your WordPress install gets a crazy number of hits you will probably fall under the Free Tier.