containers-roadmap VS s3-benchmark

Thanks for showing up and answering questions. Congratulations on the release.

What kind of plans for support of Rust's evolving async ecosystem?

Any particular reason why the public roadmap does not show the columns similar to "Researching", "We're Working On It" like the other similar public AWS Roadmaps? See example for Containers: https://github.com/aws/containers-roadmap/projects/1

Would be nice to have fully working examples on Github, for most common scenarios across most AWS services. This is something that historically

Second, We will only rely on one managed node group, but we will leverage Karpenter; however, karpenter needs to be deployed on a node. (This may change soon once the Karpenter is available on the EKS Control Plane.) [EKS] Karpenter inside control plane · Issue #1792 · aws/containers-roadmap

As written in the AWS documentation, during periods of extremely high demand, Fargate Spot capacity might be unavailable. In concrete terms, if your ECS service is set up to execute tasks in 100% Spot, there is a risk of running out of capacity. A workaround has been created in the hope that one day this issue will be implemented by the AWS team. This workaround allows you to set up two ECS services :

Deploying Fargate with CDK has to have been the most pleasant developer experience I have ever had with any product so far.

If image caching becomes a reality with Fargate I can't imagine a need to ever use anything else

https://github.com/aws/containers-roadmap/issues/696

Eks Fargate doesn't support spot yet https://github.com/aws/containers-roadmap/issues/622

Until podman could be used with AWS ECR/ECS it's pretty much moot in my case: https://github.com/aws/containers-roadmap/issues/626

There's another benchmark somewhere showing S3 can max out a 100Gbps instance.

https://github.com/dvassallo/s3-benchmark

Another potential issue is ListBucket rate limiting. If you have lots of small objects, you'll spend most of the time waiting to discover the names than transferring data

TTFB in S3 is 20-30ms around the 50th percentile. it can go much higher at p99 [1]. In any case, rotational latency for HDD drives is an order of magnitude lower (typically 2-5ms for a seek operation).

S3 is great for higher throughput workloads where TTFB is amortized across larger downloads (this is why it's very common to use S3 as a "data lake" where larger columnar files are stored, usually at the order of hundreds of MiB).

I think it's an interesting project but perhaps explaining the use cases where this solution is beneficial would go a long way here.

[1] https://github.com/dvassallo/s3-benchmark