Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I took my first step today on working with cloud servers and chosed Amazon EC2 for this project. Since I am a bit of a newcomer on this, I didn’t fully understand their pricing:
It would be sad to have instances idling and costing us money when we do not use them…
Thanks a lot!
Yes, it costs money when the instance is powered-on, no matter if it does productive work or not.
The advantage of EC2 is that you can shut down idle instances and restart them later.
Of course, for a public-facing web service, you need at least one web server running at all time, so this applies more for peak-time extra capacity.
In contrast, Google App Engine manages server instance lifecycle automatically, and only bills for CPU cycles (and other resources) that you actually use. But in order for them to be able to do that, you are severely limited in what you can do, and have to trust them to properly scale your application (no way to take an active part in server deployment).