Google Cloud customer wakes up to $18,000 bill despite $7 budget
22 points
2 hours ago
| 3 comments
| tomshardware.com
| HN
victor106
30 minutes ago
[-]
Why doesn’t GCP provide a way to say “shut down all my services if my cap is reached”?
reply
ReptileMan
2 hours ago
[-]
That is quite hostile to their consumers, no matter how they spin it. If you put a budget on something it should be capped.
reply
dpoloncsak
1 hour ago
[-]
I am the last person to defend Google Cloud and it's awful UX.

With that said, when you go to set a budget it warns you "Setting a budget does not cap resource or API consumption. Learn more." with a hyperlink to https://docs.cloud.google.com/billing/docs/how-to/budgets?_g...

reply
Telaneo
54 minutes ago
[-]
The only way I can read that is 'setting a cap does nothing' but reading that tells me that it only turns on email notifications. Not any better really. It's simply not a cap. It's an alarm.
reply
sunaookami
52 minutes ago
[-]
Yes, there is no way to set a budget for Google Cloud. And alarms are delayed up to two hours (!)
reply
7bit
51 minutes ago
[-]
Click here to let the puppy life*

* By clicking here you agree to kill it

And you're defending that?

reply
perryizgr8
54 minutes ago
[-]
I think I read somewhere that calculating and limiting cloud usage costs is a really hard problem. But I feel that if Google were motivated to do it, they can do it. It's hard, not impossible. They just don't care to solve this particular problem.
reply
subscribed
26 minutes ago
[-]
If they can COUNT it and charge based on that, that means they can count it and react.

If I, not having their budget or engineers, can have pretty much instant Prometheus event reacting to metrics, surely it wouldn't be too hard for them to have triggers like this -- somehow their AI can automatically ban people based on something, can't they do something for the customers?

They can, just don't want to.

reply
AlotOfReading
47 minutes ago
[-]
It's the same fundamental problem as view counters, something Google is famously good at solving. Eventually consistent solutions are well-understood, and wouldn't have these kinds of massive cost-overruns.
reply
lazide
35 minutes ago
[-]
Depends on latency. 24 hour delays on an eventually consistent counter used for billing absolutely would cause this problem.
reply
moring
10 minutes ago
[-]
It seems hard to believe that a one-hour delay on such a counter is impossible to achieve, and one hour would reduce the risk from "catastrophic" to "serious problem" in most cases.

Also, if implementing a cap is a desired feature that justifies trade-offs to be made, then it is psosible to translate the budget cap (in terms of money) back into service-specific caps that are easier to keep consistent. Such as "autoscale this set of VMs" and "my budget cap is $1000/hour", with the VM type being priced at $10/hour, translated to "autoscale to at most 100 instances". That would need dev work (i.e. this feature being considered important) and would not respect the budget cap in a cross-service way automatically, but still it is another piece in the puzzle.

reply
jdgoesmarching
25 minutes ago
[-]
It’s hard on AWS as well, but I agree. There’s just no incentive for the billing experience to be better.
reply