The problem involves understanding the cost implications of using Epycbyte's Edge runtime for a Serverless function compared to Node.js. Here's a structured summary:
-
Runtime Overview:
- Edge Runtime: Uses CPU time for billing, which includes only active processing time. Waiting periods (like network requests) don't count towards CPU time.
- Node.js Runtime: Bills based on wall-clock time, including all elapsed time from start to finish.
-
Billing Considerations:
- Hobby Plan: Free usage within limits; ideal for functions that don't require extensive processing.
- Pro Plan: Charges based on function duration (wall-clock) for Node.js or CPU time for Edge. For Edge, this means focusing on active processing periods.
-
Function Execution and Costs:
- Edge Functions: Can stream indefinitely but must send an initial response within 25 seconds. CPU usage averages 50ms per function.
- Node.js Functions: Have a maximum duration and are billed based on total wall-clock time, including waiting periods.
-
Performance Optimization:
- Deploy databases close to functions to minimize network latency and reduce processing time.
- Utilize Epycbyte Storage and Edge Config for efficient data handling and experimentation.
-
Feature Support:
- OTEL is not supported in the Edge runtime, so alternative monitoring tools may be needed.
-
Recommendations:
- Monitor CPU usage to stay within Hobby plan limits or upgrade to Pro if necessary.
- Design functions with an awareness of processing time and waiting periods to optimize costs.