Always consider if 12 hours of lost revenue is worth the savings. Recently hetzner has been flakey with minimum or no response for support or even status updates that anything was wrong. My favorite was them blaming an issue on my side just to have a maintenance status update the day after about congestion.
Atlas wasn't giving us any support for $3K per month. Hetzner at least have some channel to contact them, which is an improvement. That said, if their uptime is rubbish them we'll probably migrate again. Moving back to Atlas is not an option as we were getting hammered by the data transfer costs and this was only going to increase due to our architecture. Thanks for reading!
500GB isn't a lot of data, and $3K/month seems like an extortion for that little data.
Having said that, MongoDB pricing page promises 99.995% uptime, which is outstanding, and would probably be hard to beat that doing it oneself, even after adding redundancy. But maybe you don't need that much uptime for your particular use case.
Yep, we just migrated to Atlas, and the disk size limitation of the lower instance tiers pushed us to do a round of data cleaning before the migration.
Also, we noticed that after migration, the databases that were occupying ~600GB of disk in our (very old) on premise deployment, were around 1TB big on Atlas. After talking with support for a while we found that they were using Snappy compression with a relatively low compression level and we couldn't change that by ourselves. After requesting it through support, we changed to zstd compression, rebuilt all the storage, and a day or two later our storage was under 500GB.
And backup pricing is super opaque. It doesn't show concrete pricing on the docs, just ranges. And depending on the cloud you deployed, snapshots are priced differently so you can't just multiply you storage by the number of the snapshots, and they aren't transparent about the real size of the snapshots.
Curious what kind of deployments you are running with them? I only have personal stuff with Hetzner; but never had issues so far (bare metal in my case coz cheap for what I get and need).
If I understand correctly, the author's company provides a CAPTCHA alternative, which presumably means that if their service goes down, all of their customer's logins, forms, etc. either become inoperable or don't provide the security the company is promising by using their service.
This makes me want to use the company's service less because now I know they can't survive an outage in a consistent and resilient way.
We have 14 servers and counting running the frontend captcha service, we have a high uptime which you can observe here: https://portal.prosopo.io/status
We have extra provisions for enterprise clients to provide rock solid SLAs for every use case.
The db in question is our data store for event that we use for aggregated features such as traffic analysis and ml. This service lags behind our realtime services so we can deal with some downtime if necessary
I think the issue stems from their poor cloud infrastructure since that's where I've had the most issues the dedicated servers seem fine, that being said 2 years prior I had no issues either so it's definitely something recent.
