[re-thc]

> If they are self-managing all the extras you get with a decent cloud setup (node failover, load distribution and auto-scaling, multi-region or at least multi-DC for availability beyond single node failures, …)

History has proven that most of the time these reduce availability than increase them. Any sort of failover and the complicated setups to get it going introduces bugs and issues more than the redundancy it provides.

Have we forgotten the number of large single server applications running on single linux machines that never needed an unplanned restart or had a crash for years? And you can't beat AWS us-east-1 or Azure or GCP in outages lately.

And I doubt any service like this needs auto-scaling. Most services barely will use up a proper single server i.e. something with >96 cores >1TB of RAM.

> “Cloud” is still expensive compared to buying and managing individual nodes > And sometimes just not having to deal with all that, keeping the business more focused on its core competencies, is worth the extra expense.

There are ways to not manage all that and still be in the cloud. It's called don't use AWS or Azure.