请问HN：离开AWS Lambda/SQS/SNS/Aurora，真的会更糟吗？
我们的客户有兴趣在本地使用我们的SaaS解决方案，以降低服务中断的风险。<p>考虑到这一机会，我正在评估本地部署的成本，并可能部分或完全迁移离开AWS。<p>我们当前的技术栈包括EC2、Lambda、SQS、SNS、Aurora、S3以及一些小型网络设置。AWS的部署是通过`serverless V3`完成的。所有代码都是用Node.js编写的，使用NGINX进行路由。<p>我认为从AWS迁移的主要好处有：
1. 部署简便，只需在所有服务器上执行`rsync`并在分片数据库上运行迁移。
2. 无供应商锁定。
3. 成本节省，目前我们的成本较低，但账单在稳步增加。
而我主要担心的是：
1. 管理服务：SQS、SNS、Lambda、Aurora都是为自动扩展而管理的。从经验来看，这真的有必要吗？还是更大的服务器就能解决问题？
2. 实际迁移工作：我们是一个精简的团队，但发现从其他服务（Cognito、DynamoDB）迁移比预期的要容易。
3. 服务质量下降：SQS、SNS、Lambda能否在不损失功能的情况下轻松替换？我正在考虑RabbitMQ。<p>如果有人进行过类似的迁移，结果如何？另外，我在谈论本地部署，但这真的是降低服务中断风险的最佳解决方案吗？
查看原文
Our clients are interested in using our SaaS solution on-premises to mitigate the risk of service interruption.<p>Considering the opportunity, I am assessing the cost of doing on-premise deployments and maybe partially or fully moving away from AWS.<p>Our current stack is EC2/lambda/SQS/SNS/Aurora/S3 & minor networking setups. AWS deployments made via `serverless V3`. All the code is in Node.js., NGINX is used for routing.<p>The main benefits I see in moving away from AWS are:
1. Ease of deployment, simply do an `rsync` on all servers and run migrations on the sharded database.
2. No vendor lock-in
3. Cost saving, we have minor costs for now but the bill is steadily increasing.
And my main fears are:
1. Managed services: SQS/SNS/lambda/Aurora are managed for autoscaling. From experience, is it really necessary or does a bigger server do the trick?
2. Actual migration effort: we are a lean team but we found that migrating away from other services (Cognito, DynamoDB) was easier than expected.
3. Worse service: can SQS/SNS/lambda easily be replaced without feature loss? I am looking at RabbitMQ.<p>If anyone did a similar migration, how did it go for you? Also I am talking about on-premise but is it the best solution to mitigate the risk of service interruption?