I hear this a lot, and I completely understand why people want it. The problem is that it's not as easy as just saying "don't let me spend more than X." What happens when you reach X, but you still have data stored in S3, or on EFS volumes, or snapshots? Yes, you can shut down an EC2 or RDS instance, stop allows Lambda executions, and generally make the account unusable until the end of the billing period, but there are still costs that have nothing to do with anything happening. I think that's why AWS chose to focus on budgets. They allow you to be alerted when spend reaches a certain point. That puts you in control of what you do next. Maybe you're okay deleting all the data. Maybe you want to exceed the budget this month. Caps are hard. I wouldn't be surprised to see AWS come up with a solution here, but I also wouldn't be surprised if they don't. After all, your loss is their gain. ;)
Did you read the post? At any time is stated it is a simple solution. I even talked about alarms – these are not the issues discussed in this post. I talk about social, cultural and economic issues new people learning Cloud in the Global South faces that a cap would be much welcomed.
But what actually happens when that limit is hit? Are all your files in S3 deleted? Would the remaining storage costs for the rest of the month roll over to the next month?
At the very least, there could be a cap for ‘stoppable’ costs that doesn’t apply when data would be deleted. Running instances is usually much more expensive than storing data.
I realise though there are issues with this too - eg. Elasticsearch service can’t be stopped, deletion would be the only option.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I hear this a lot, and I completely understand why people want it. The problem is that it's not as easy as just saying "don't let me spend more than X." What happens when you reach X, but you still have data stored in S3, or on EFS volumes, or snapshots? Yes, you can shut down an EC2 or RDS instance, stop allows Lambda executions, and generally make the account unusable until the end of the billing period, but there are still costs that have nothing to do with anything happening. I think that's why AWS chose to focus on budgets. They allow you to be alerted when spend reaches a certain point. That puts you in control of what you do next. Maybe you're okay deleting all the data. Maybe you want to exceed the budget this month. Caps are hard. I wouldn't be surprised to see AWS come up with a solution here, but I also wouldn't be surprised if they don't. After all, your loss is their gain. ;)
Did you read the post? At any time is stated it is a simple solution. I even talked about alarms – these are not the issues discussed in this post. I talk about social, cultural and economic issues new people learning Cloud in the Global South faces that a cap would be much welcomed.
But what actually happens when that limit is hit? Are all your files in S3 deleted? Would the remaining storage costs for the rest of the month roll over to the next month?
Yes, delete it. Is for educational purposes not to run your production workload.
At the very least, there could be a cap for ‘stoppable’ costs that doesn’t apply when data would be deleted. Running instances is usually much more expensive than storing data.
I realise though there are issues with this too - eg. Elasticsearch service can’t be stopped, deletion would be the only option.