patternMinor
Is AWS Fargate suitable for web applications?
Viewed 0 times
applicationsforawswebsuitablefargate
Problem
I'm making a web-app, I've tried both ECS and EKS at AWS. It's been very comfortable to use Fargate instances instead of EC2. But I'm not sure I understand how to use them since when I count at it, it's so much more expensive. Prices
In the prices it says ~$0.05/h/vCPU which would mean 37.5$/m/vCPU. Which is very expensive compared to EC2. But from what I've understood Fargate is more suitable for container that have a limited lifetime? Does this mean that they are not useable at all(or atleast price worthy) for a webapp that's running 24/7? My web app can really shutdown an start up by requests, it would be to slow. Is there something I'm missing?
In the prices it says ~$0.05/h/vCPU which would mean 37.5$/m/vCPU. Which is very expensive compared to EC2. But from what I've understood Fargate is more suitable for container that have a limited lifetime? Does this mean that they are not useable at all(or atleast price worthy) for a webapp that's running 24/7? My web app can really shutdown an start up by requests, it would be to slow. Is there something I'm missing?
Solution
Fargate is absolutely suitable for web apps. We have many customers that use it that way (and many others that use it in a more "batchy" way). Fargate is a managed compute engine and AWS takes a more responsibilities in terms of scaling, patching, security, and so forth so comparing raw Fargate costs to raw EC2 costs isn't how I would compare them. Having that said, raw EC2 capacity (like for like) is usually just 20% cheaper than raw Fargate capacity. If you factor in the cost of operations (less with Fargate) and the fact that you hardly drive EC2 clusters at full utilization, the comparison tends to skew towards Fargate most of the times. These are a couple of blogs that talk about this (blog one and blog two).
Context
StackExchange DevOps Q#13864, answer score: 6
Revisions (0)
No revisions yet.