
AWS: Scaling Up to 10M Users - mariuz
https://www.slideshare.net/AmazonWebServices/ent309-scaling-up-to-your-first-10-million-users-78927643
======
Sujan
Great resource.

Now let's talk to the 0 user startups with trivial data with their
SOA/microservices, NoSQL databases or sharded data bases...

------
machbio
AWS Scaling beyond 1 Million would mean that you have a global audience - AWS
does not have any Global LoadBalancer for customers who do not want to use
Route53 - has anyone worked on Global Loadbalancer on AWS infrastructure
without Route53 ?

~~~
Thaxll
What do you mean by global load balancer? You can use AWS loadbalancer without
Route53.

~~~
sacheendra
I think he means Anycast routing. Technically, one could run their own
nameservers which direct to their own load balancers.

Or you could use one of the other DNS providers who provide Anycast support. I
think DynDNS does it.

~~~
minxomat
Anycast is easy to setup. Scaling it is another story:
[https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/build-your-own-anycast-
networ...](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/build-your-own-anycast-
network-9-steps-samir-jafferali)

Though most people that are convinced they need anycast would be better served
with 53's GeoDNS

------
nevon
Great slides. The only thing I disagree with is that I think you should put
your instances into an autoscaling group from day one. You don't even need to
autoscale, but just by having your instance(s) in an autoscaling group, you'll
be able to deal with instances dying without having to take manual action.
Just an autoscaling group with a desired capacity of 2 will take you a long,
long way without significant complexity.

------
dpflan
Is there a similar resource / slide deck for scaling on GCP?

~~~
luhn
Same concepts apply, you just have to map the AWS services to the GCP
alternatives. Autoscaling Groups = Managed Instance Groups, ELB/ALB = Cloud
Load Balancing, RDS = Cloud SQL, etc.

~~~
dpflan
For sure, makes sense! I'm not familiar with the GCP alternatives, and you
seem to be on a roll: care to keep the equivalency mapping going? :) (We may
end up crowdsourcing generation of a GCP version of these slides...)

~~~
luhn
Off the top of my head, what I remember mentioned in the slides:

* Elasticache = Managed Redis and Memcache isn't available on GCP. (I really wish it was.)

* S3 = Cloud Storage

* CloudFront = Cloud CDN

* SQS = Cloud PubSub

* Elastic Beanstalk/CodeDeploy — No GCP alternative.

* Lambda = Cloud Functions (Beta)

Nice thing about GCP is that they don't get creative with naming, so it's
pretty easy to infer what their services do.

------
pibefision
Which is the point when you decide to go server less?

~~~
scrollaway
As early as possible. Things like AWS Lambda require you to really
architecture for them in order to get the full benefit of it.

Lambda is also nearly costless if you have little traffic so it's not like you
would pay extra for it. But serverless architecture isn't always the right
decision.

Serverless shines when you have an unpredictable amount of async tasks to run,
and those tasks can take a long time to run. Thumbnailing images for example.

~~~
eloff
Lambda has a 5 minute execution limit. It's not that great for background
tasks unless you can divide them up to keep them comfortably under that limit.
It shouldn't be that hard, but it's not effortless either.

