Managed Redis on Google Cloud Platform

https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2018/04/Accelerating-innovation-for-cloud-native-managed-databases.html

by deesix • 8 years ago

140 42 8 years ago

cloudplatform.googleblog.com

nodesocket2• 8 years ago

Great. Does this support persisting to disk RDB[1] or AOF[2]?

Pricing seems reasonable?

1GB of Redis data is $0.049 per GB hour. 730 hours in a month = $0.049 * 1 * 730 = $35.77/mo.

5GB of Redis data is $0.027 per GB hour. 730 hours in a month = $0.027 * 5 * 730 = $98.55/mo.

[1][2] https://redis.io/topics/persistence

jkaplowitz2• 8 years ago

Those prices are not per hour, but per GB-hour. So multiply your second monthly price by 5. Not cheaper for more data, but definitely cheaper per GB.

nodesocket2• 8 years ago

Oops. Duh, that makes more sense. Updated.

siscia• 8 years ago

I don't think this is Redis, this is something that fully supports the Redis protocol.

I wouldn't be that much surprised if underneath use a custom implentation.

Said so, arguably, RDB and AOF are not a concern of the user but of the administrator so I wouldn't expect them...

threeseed• 8 years ago

Amazon Elasticache by comparison:

1.5GB is $0.034 per hour = $24.82/mo.

6GB is $0.182 per hour = $132.82/mo.

They just run Redis on stock EC2 hardware hence the odd GB numbers.

But one advantage of AWS is that with Reserved Instance pricing you could get those numbers down by 2/3.

gcbirzan6• 8 years ago

The standard tier is supposed to persist data (and it did, during maintenance events - it was an alpha, so yeah - there was no data loss), but not sure what they use as the logs are not yet available.

ssambros5• 8 years ago

It's not data persistence per se, it's just replication to another instance in a different zone. Persistence is not currently available but plans are in place.

Disclaimer: I am an engineer at Google on the managed Redis team.

UPD: replication -> persistence not available

maltalex• 8 years ago

For comparison, here are the prices for managed Redis instances in Azure (Central US) [0]:

Basic Tier (single instance, no SLA)

1GB - $40.15/month

2.5GB - $65.70/month

6GB - $131.40/month

Standard Tier (Primary/secondary replicated instance, SLA)

1GB - $100.74/Month

2.5GB - $164.25/month

6GB - $328.50/month

Premium Tier (Cluster, w/persistence, SLA)

6GB - $405.15/month

[0] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/cache/

ssambros5• 8 years ago

May I ask what is the planned use case for the RDB/AOF replication? Are you expecting to have access to the snapshots while the instance is running, or you just need them for import/export or durability reasons?

Disclaimer: I am an engineer at Google on the managed Redis team.

ctavan2• 8 years ago

Use case for RDB backups: for rather large redis datasets (>50GB) with long living keys (90days and beyond) I found it useful to be able to parse an RDB snapshot using the python rdbtools and iterate over the whole dataset, e.g. in order to migrate data to a different format. I found this usually more stable and reliable than using SCAN and the likes.

hesdeadjim• 8 years ago

Huge fan of RedisLabs, but I'm all for more managed Redis options.

squid3• 8 years ago

NodeChef Redis Hosting is another option that makes it easy to deploy, operate, and scale Redis in the cloud. https://nodechef.com/redis-hosting

manigandham3• 8 years ago

Please use a disclaimer that this is your company if you're going to advertise

sterwill• 8 years ago

I used RedisLabs in a project about 3 years ago where I wanted durable storage, and the service was excellent. Latency in us-east-1 was low, the management interface was snappy, and scaling up storage took just a couple of clicks. I'd probably use a "locally managed" Redis service (ElastiCache in AWS, Google's service in GCP, etc.) for volatile caching in the future, since it's one less vendor to manage, but I'd recommend RedisLabs to anyone who is considering it.

pcx• 8 years ago

Compatibility with the Redis protocol means you can migrate your applications with zero code changes.

Does this mean they don't actually use Redis, but have an alternate implementation of the protocol? In such a case, wouldn't it be different it terms of performance when compared to the original one. Also, keeping up with new versions should be a major overhead. If Google is still doing an alternate implementation, I wonder what could be the reason.

jkaplowitz2• 8 years ago

It's probably built on top of Google's standard production software and hardware stack, the same thing they use to run most of their standard services like search and Gmail. This tech stack tends to have evolved earlier than and separately from the public equivalent.

It generally scales and performs better than normal tech stacks, but its components are so different and so mutually interdependent that it's bad at directly running normal software. The protocol, however, can be implemented just fine.

To be clear: Even though I worked at Google in the past, I don't now, am not speaking for Google, and know nothing secret about this product. I'm extrapolating from widely known general knowledge about Google's technical infrastructure.

mk89• 8 years ago

It's the same with Aws elasticache. There is redis underneath, still, if you want to have all the features that they provide - scale in/out, replicas, etc, you'll need to have some tools around.

I would say yes, it's still different than using the original one, but that's the way it is when you use any managed service.

paxys• 8 years ago

Will be different, yes, but in the same way any two instances of "real" Redis will be different.

Hardware, networking, routing, load balancing, memory and disk IO, number of instances, backups/failovers etc. are going to be deciding overall performance rather than the Redis binary itself.

Lunatic666• 8 years ago

We have a Redis+Memcached frontend with an Apache Ignite Backend. Now we can re-use existing functionality in the clients and have new features like read-through based on a MySQL database or an automatically updated near cache on the instances themselves.

ddorian43• 8 years ago

Are you talking about this https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/redis

If yes, that's 5% redis features.

gcbirzan6• 8 years ago

It's not an alternative implementation. I've been on the alpha and some of the bugs were actually bugs in the OSS redis.

wasd• 8 years ago

Reach out to us to let us know what kinds of managed database services you’d like us to offer next.

Hey Google friends,

I'm not ready to move over to GCloud but I'm interested in prototyping a few applications. Here's a few things on my wishlist:

* Wrapping the cli tool for common db tasks in the way heroku does (ex: heroku pg:push - push local database to production database, heroku pg:pull - pulls production database to local).

* Simpler integration of Cloud SQL with AppEngine flex. It's not a lot of work (https://cloud.google.com/appengine/docs/flexible/python/usin...) but it would be cool to build a flex environment / provision a sql database / setup connection strings in one swoop.

* While you're at it, better AppEngine flex introductory pricing ($40 / mo for 1 vcpu, 512 mb ram) :)

Not related to managed databases but hopefully helpful. TLDR Heroku but on GCloud.

nivertech3• 8 years ago

Too bad you still need to provision instance and reserve max capacity.

They had a chance to outcompete AWS by providing a truly serverless Redis-like service with no upfront commitment and pay-per-use.

That’s what I expected when I first heard that GCP is working on “Serverless Redis” a year ago.

jjeaff• 8 years ago

Ya, that's not serverless by any definition of the word. It's "managed" redis.

tpetry3• 8 years ago

Where do you read you have to provision instances? I have to choose between Basic and Standard. But there‘s no clear indication that i have to select an instance based on my storage requirements. The pricing information does not indicate different instances for the different storage requirements, it could be, but would not really fit how the rest of gcp works.

nivertech3• 8 years ago

The lowest tier says min 1GB. So I guess it starts from $35.77/mo, even if your app doesn’t need the whole 1GB.

sandGorgon• 8 years ago

will this support the new upcoming Streams datastructure in redis ?

I'm looking forward to a lightweight, hosted kafka replacement using redis streams.

manigandham3• 8 years ago

https://RedisLabs.com probably will, if you just want a managed offering. They are cheaper, and the official sponsor of the redis project now with support for the latest releases.

gcbirzan6• 8 years ago

Currently, the only available version is 3.2, so that's a no.

wiradikusuma• 8 years ago

I'm an GAE user, and I use Memcached there. Implementation aside, how does this different than GAE's Memcached? (from perspective of running on Google Cloud)

Managed Redis on Google Cloud Platform

Related Stories