I like the idea behind serverless development, but DO is $5/month and is easy to setup and maintain. From what I understand as your business grows AWS costs skyrocket and just starting out it's more complicated than a DO solution.
The idea is great, but looking forward to the day where serverless is the default solution because it's easier and cheaper. Not sure we're there yet.
Once you hit high levels of traffic, instead of panicking and trying to add more servers and fixing DB structure, you do a cost benefit analysis and see what to do next. Either work on reducing your cost slope, or make it logarithmic by moving to regular servers.
> Once you hit high levels of traffic, instead of panicking and trying to add more servers and fixing DB structure, you do a cost benefit analysis and see what to do next. Either work on reducing your cost slope, or make it logarithmic by moving to regular servers.
...and that's a good reason to try to avoid the lock-in of AWS specific services. Relatively entry level setups on alternative platforms will let you scale well past the system where AWS costs starts to get painful and people start panicking about how to cut costs. When you hit that point you really don't want to be facing a major re-engineering effort to be able to even use other options to bring the cost down just as the costs are soaring.
It's actually closer to 70x
Hetzner: 1.25 USD per TB (after 30 TB free per server) [1]
AWS: 90 USD per TB [2]
So, 100 TB at Hetzner will cost you 125 USD (not counting the 30 TB free). You would pay 9000 USD at AWS.
I had to migrate away from Hetzner because I was actually paying 300 dollars on traffic alone.