Your pricing currently seems prohibitive for that kind of use case. Shouldn't it be usage-based so one can build a product where users can connect their apps without having to worry about arbitrary limits on plans? There should be a PAYG option that simply charges per connection, and automatic volume discounts.
the custom priced tier has usage based pricing. Admittedly, we’re still trying to nail down the unit economics of it all, which is pretty tricky in our case. That’s partly why wanted to release the free dev tier and cheap pro tier, so people can get started with building lightweight projects already. But I 100% agree that the next step is a self-serve PAYG tier.
Essentially, you pay for database queries and events, with 60'000 included for free, which is plenty for experimenting and small projects. Price per million queries/events is then based on the plan you're subscribed to, and with Starter you have zero monthly fixed costs and only pay for queries and events above 60'000.
No CPU-time and similar that's usually hard to grok.
Take a look at the Accelerate and Pulse pricing details. Prisma Postgres comes bundled with these, so the pay-as-you-go pricing is the same: https://www.prisma.io/pricing#accelerate
We'll continue to make improvements to the pricing on the way to General Availability to make it both as easy to understand and affordable as possible.
If pricing is only done by storage limits, egress and query count (but not resource usage) how do you prevent something like a massive cross join with an aggregation from just running for ages on a single query?
We are looking for input on this during the EA phase. Here's how we plan for this to work:
- Each incremental concurrent query allocates additional compute resource to your database
- All queries share that pool of compute resource
- Queries have strict timeout limits. 10 seconds on most plans configurable up to 60 seconds.
Prisma Postgres is designed to serve interactive applications with users waiting for a response. In a sense, we are adopting some of the design principles underlying DynamoDB (strict limits on queries) and combining it with the flexibility of a Postgres database that is fully yours to configure and use as you see fit.
I don't want limits on the kinds of queries I can run when those limits are artificial ones imposed to work around limitations of a too-simple billing system instead of being inherent in the domain. I'm willing to pay extra for the occasional huge query, but I wouldn't feel comfortable knowing I couldn't make it at all.
How much overlap is there in the “serverless database that starts fast” group and the “might have a query that runs for 60 sec” group? If you’re running queries that are that complex, wouldn’t you be better served with a different database service?
That said, a production OLTP workload database would also have query timeout imposed, otherwise those fine folks in the crappy query writing department will surely bring it down.
Having query timeouts instantly makes me write this solution off.
Companies, especially smaller ones starting out, will run analytics in the same DB as the application DB.
A major plus of using a Postgres DB is the flexibility of doing analytics and serving apps. It can do it all. Analytics queries will often easily exceed your timeout limits.
Does that mean that using Prisma Accelerate and Pulse with an external database will cost the same as using it with the bundled database? (Since I don’t see database-specific costs for storage, read replicas, PITR, backups)
While Prisma Postgres in in early access, yes. This is why there's no ability to change the database config right now.
However, when we release Prisma Postgres in GA (couple of months), you will be able to upgrade your postgres instance (CPU, storage, etc.) and that will be db-specific cost.
A fellow HN reader I know in a Covid Cautious online community shared your comment with me, and I just wanted to come here to say that you’re not alone.
There are some of us who stay largely indoors and only leave the house for essential visits, with a respirator. I’m one of those people.
I don’t know if you’re able to find a local community that’s cautious too.
But if you want to talk, I have contact details in my bio.
And Long COVID is shaping up to be our generation’s HIV/AIDS.
History rhymes because people don’t ever learn. We deal with one problem or crisis at a time, instead of generalizing what was learned in order to help future generations avoid the same mistakes.
Why do you think I said Long COVID is shaping up to be like HIV/AIDS?
The parallels between the two are stark: How the CDC and NIH bungled public health advice and research funding, how clinicians are ill-equipped to treat it, how the public is clueless about the long-term harms of post-viral immune dysregulation [0].
Both AIDS and Long COVID are post-viral, multi-organ, chronic conditions that dysregulate the immune system, through many of the same mechanisms [0].
They are also conditions that severely affects the quality of life of those who are afflicted, increasing the risk of severe life-threatening illnesses [1].
Similar to the early years of the AIDS pandemic (which, I might add, is still ongoing), the harms of Long COVID are not widely understood or acknowledged in clinical practice or among the general population.
That’s because most of such “UX” articles are written by junior designers looking for a job (writing to promote themselves) or working in an IT services agency (writing to promote the agency).
These individuals tend not to have a whit of formal HCI education or real-world practice.
When you have little theoretical grounding and real world experience, all you have is examples from apps you spot in the wild to learn from. You don’t know what makes something work, and you have never seen it work yourself.
You might learn the wrong thing: that if some popular or financially-successful app out there has implemented a particular design pattern, that it must be a “best practice”.
It’s kind of like how most “how-to” articles, YouTube tutorials, and Udemy courses in software dev are made by junior devs.
The phase after the hype dies down is called “The Slope of Enlightenment”. Hopefully that’s true for crypto, since the space has incubated a lot of good but poorly-executed ideas.
Microsoft helping climb the slope of enlightenment doesn’t sound like a half-bad idea.
My hunch is that someday crypto will be accrued and used like frequent flyer miles or credit card rewards points. But the "better than any alternative" part is that they'll be more fungible than rewards points.
Frequent flyer miles are just a marketing gimmick. They're not "useful" as in serving an irreplaceable purpose; frequent flyer miles could be outlawed tomorrow and the world would not be a worse place in any way.
Considering KYC requirements, volatility, and environmental impact not sure how crypto money in browser would be a net benefit for anyone except speculators and crypto exchanges.
If people are paying with stablecoins on top of ETH (like the ERC20 version of USDC, for example) then neither volatilty nor environmental impact is a serious problem.
What part of the "Dozen 'stable' coin fails in the past years" lesson are you having difficulties with?
There can never be a "stable" offer in this space. the stability comes from "free to print money" organisations and the only acceptable such organisations are governments (not ideal, certainly not 100% stable but the only viable one). Everything that still contributes to keep up the speculation hype value of these cryptocurrencies (and a wallet by a wellknown players does contribute to it) is a net negative.
>What part of the "Dozen 'stable' coin fails in the past years" lesson are you having difficulties with?
The part where the major stablecoins (eg. USDC or even Tether) hasn't failed yet, and the "dozen" you speak of are the equivalent of shitcoins that never had any traction in the first place.
USDC is not stable. They have long ago removed their 1 to 1 peg with the USD because it was unsustainable. They are printing money and the value is being kept up only on the speculative expectations of the market. Like all other shitcoins they can not guarantee anything when things start to go down. Noone can guarantee anything. Those shitcoins that never had any traction according to you have cost billions to the people.
Some see it as a feature yes, but it's not sustainable.
In fact I would say that we are already behind the hay day of wild west crypto and are entering the phase of regulated fiance. Investors are already discovering why some of those regulations exist in the first place (latest example FTX) and governments are done standing at the sidelines.
Hahahahaha. Yeah, sure cryptocurrency never comes crashing down. It certainly would never lose 60% of its value in 6 months. That would never happen. What a perfect store of value. /s
I assume you're not arguing this but crypto isn't really a solution for this problem.
Regardless, I think given the wild west of crime and fraud a world without banking surveillance would allow I don't think that's a great plan, and I doubt legitimate banks would be for it either given the legal grief they would be constantly in, assuming that you still believe that assets should be able to be seized or frozen in case of identified illegal activity, and if not a bank now needs to be comfortable knowing it's enabling human trafficking and terrorism.
Why should a bank be willing to do business with you if they can't identify you?
considering that the Tax Authorities have money today, while 'bros are looking for some.. I would guess that MSFT is on the side of the money.. that means, track your INCOME and the TAX that is due. mark my words
