Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

My company runs a cloud service for ClickHouse. We've spent a lot of time thinking about pricing. In the end we arrived at (VMs + allocated storage) * management uplift + support fee.

It's not a newfangled serverless pricing model, but it's something I can reason about as a multi-decade developer of database apps. I feel comfortable that our users--mostly devs--feel the same way. We work to help people optimize the compute and storage down to the lowest levels that meet their SLAs. The most important property of the model is that costs are capped.

One of the things that I hear a lot from users of products like BigQuery is that they get nailed on consumption costs that they can't relate in a meaningful way to application behavior. There's a lot of innovation around SaaS pricing for data services but I'm still not convinced that the more abstract models really help users. We ourselves get nailed by "weird shit" expenses like use cases that hammer Zookeeper in bad ways across availability zones. We eat them because we don't think users should need to understand internals to figure out costs. The best SaaS services abstract away operational details and have a simple billing model that doesn't break when something unexpected happens on your apps.

Would love to hear alternative view points. It's not an easy problem.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: