It's probably all in line with the ToS and everything, but I find it a bit shady that I have to investigate this, rather than having a free offering that doesn't suddenly charge me.
It's probably all in line with the ToS and everything, but I find it a bit shady that I have to investigate this, rather than having a free offering that doesn't suddenly charge me.
- Up to 3 shared-cpu-1x 256mb VMs
- 3GB persistent volume storage (total)
- 160GB outbound data transfer
If you spin up, say, 4 VMs you will pay for it.
No thanks Oracle even for 24GB free VMs!
But that is not all
My account is now "inactive", with no option to activate it and with no option to even pay and upgrade to paid tier.
The account is in some broken state where half of the dialogues produce dialogues like "Authorization failed or requested resource not found", like I had account with permissions denied to everything.
Even the "upgrade to paid tier" option gives
> You do not have access to perform this operation. Please contact your cloud account administrator for additional access.
Utter fucking disgrace
You may want to check if you also have a domain name purcahed through route53 that is set for automatic renewal every 3 years or whatever
So I don't really care if one service costs x2 if the difference is between 5 and 10, but I care a lot if I could accidentally end up with a $2000 bill one day (and warnings don't count - not much good if I get a warning if I'm away from my laptop in a log cabin or something).
That's why I stay away from e.g. AWS for side projects, too many histories of a stupid mistake that costed quite a bit of money when all that is needed is some breaker if usage is exceeded beyond a point.
If you're getting charged you should run `fly apps list` and see if you have more than two apps running.
One thing that trips people up is Postgres. Postgres is just another fly app. So if you moved two apps with DBs, you're probably running four total apps. We prompt you for database info when you do this, though, it's not done in the background.
One problem we've come across is expectations from Heroku users. We are very different (like the Postgres thing, there's no shared tenant postgres). People expect us to be the same. We haven't figured out how to expose those differences to people in a way that sticks.
Sounds like there may be room for improvement in your documentation.
Apps
-----------------------------------------
myappname shared-cpu-1x
myappname-db 1GB shared-cpu-1xSecond paragraph
As a company with a cushion, hosting a profitable app, it might be worth doing the usage-based pricing to try and save some money. But the risk is just not worth it for smaller projects