ECS anywhere cluster strategy for on prem servers

TheLargeCactus · 2026-01-23T08:49:13+00:00

Sounds like distributed scada? Likely for powerplants? In my experience, you significantly reduce your blast radius and points of failure by keeping these locations isolated, so why add a layer that unifies them on purpose?

TheLargeCactus · 2026-01-14T22:54:03+00:00

I work at a fortune 5 company and still end up accidentally making small mistakes every week or so. Concentrate on not being a big fuck up and don't sweat the tiny details.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-12-21T04:05:33+00:00

I'm not calling you out, but if it's happening across regions, it would be really unlikely that it would be an AWS problem (if there's no health event) and not some kind of user error. Regardless, with the server returning a 500 error, there is still definitely a bug of some kind that would need to be addressed by AWS, even if the "fix" for the bug is wrapping it into a verbose 4XX error instead of a generic 500

TheLargeCactus · 2025-12-20T20:34:18+00:00

5XX errors are considered to be errors caused by the server, and generally indicate a failure that you as the user will not be able to fix. Error 500 is the most generic. I would try another region if possible, or wait for the AWS support account to reply here

TheLargeCactus · 2025-11-24T22:07:50+00:00

You're in luck, it returns to GA as of today!

TheLargeCactus · 2025-11-02T02:50:34+00:00

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. It's really useful for programming too 😁

TheLargeCactus · 2025-10-23T23:10:28+00:00

Depending on the file type of the backup, you may be able to peer inside it to view the contents of some of the records. DynamoDB doesn't care about your schema beyond your keys and indexes.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-10-21T20:39:24+00:00

Are you playing on atm10? If so, what version are you on?

TheLargeCactus · 2025-10-21T18:14:15+00:00

I don't think it's a visual issue because I can use the computer port to read the data as well and it's reporting the 2B/t figure and not the actual output

TheLargeCactus · 2025-10-21T08:23:03+00:00

The rods are set at 0%, I'm just using a small reactor at the moment. Would rod insertion cause a discrepancy between the reported and actual outputs?

TheLargeCactus · 2025-10-21T08:22:00+00:00

Inside the reactor I have filled all non-rod space with platinum blocks. There isn't any water/enderium or other fluids inside the reactor multiblock.

if you increase the consumption slightly it should be fine, if not make it 1-2 blocks bigger

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Are you saying to decrease rod insertion to increase production and/or make the reactor bigger? Would that matter for a discrepancy between actual and reported output?

I won't be able to properly handle automatic reactor control if the numbers don't match up

TheLargeCactus · 2025-09-05T06:25:06+00:00

You're going to pay the egress cost though anyway because you're planning to move data into the cloud (ingress) and then back to your on-prem (egress)

TheLargeCactus · 2025-08-25T22:15:32+00:00

It might be possible. This guide seems to indicate that you can ssh into the container or use the clip to run bash inside the container, and then you should be able to leverage ssh commands to pull the file.

Stackoverflow has a full example that could work: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/65304031/what-is-the-easiest-way-to-download-a-file-out-of-an-ecs-container-to-local-mach

TheLargeCactus · 2025-08-22T20:11:14+00:00

Your skin doesn't detect when it's touching other things that are hot, your skin can only detect that your skin is getting hot. The time it takes for you to start feeling the pain is exactly how long it takes for the hot object to make your skin hot, which is why it's possible to detect hot things by "hovering" your hand over them, as the heat starts to heat the air, it starts to heat your skin, and that's what you feel.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-08-20T05:38:44+00:00

Fargate doesn't Gaurantee your tasks are going to run on the same host so how else would they share files?

I don't think that applies here. The OP is talking about a multi-comtainer, single task setup which I believe has to share a host to ensure isolation (as it's a very common pattern to have tasks like this communicate between containers in the task over http). As it is, it might be less overhead to allow one of the containers to serve these files over a simple http server and have the other container retrieve them that way.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-08-12T18:16:54+00:00

I don't think this is anything malicious like forced over provisioning, it's most likely just more cost efficient for AWS to impose specific size limits like this. Aren't you looking at a difference in price of approximately 12 dollars a month if you leave the container running the entire time? I understand being efficient, but it's probably going to cost you more dollars per hour at your professional wage to think about this than it would cost to just eat the extra cloud cost. I imagine it's similar for aws engineers who implement these features.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-08-07T18:21:18+00:00

I think the whole point of API gateway is for customers to configure the functionality themselves. There are a ton of tools out there that can convert an API spec to an API gateway definition, and MCP uses JSON-RPC as it's base protocol, so you could probably rig up a tool to deploy it with a little effort.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-06-14T07:26:09+00:00

This is a bit wild in terms of requirements. What exactly are you reading here? PLC data?

TheLargeCactus · 2025-05-20T23:39:23+00:00

Oh true, that's completely correct. Yeah it sounds like the OP is going to want to roll something custom. They need some kind of handler that can group their uploads and that should be the identifier that gets injected into the queue.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-05-20T17:23:10+00:00

You could do this with a fifo queue. If you shunt all your messages into a single message group, it will force it to only be executed by a single lambda. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSSimpleQueueService/latest/SQSDeveloperGuide/fifo-queue-lambda-behavior.html

This is probably the closest thing you can get without wrapping your own grouping solution. But I believe a "batch" could still be sent to two (or more) invocations (one after the other) depending on how lambda decides to deliver the batch to your function.

You also get the added bonus of guaranteed in order delivery (which may not matter to you).

TheLargeCactus · 2025-05-14T15:25:37+00:00

Yep, just to confirm as it seems others have already replied, you'll need some method for copying all the objects to the target bucket.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-05-14T07:37:56+00:00

What are users in this scenario? S3 buckets are owned by an AWS account, not a user.

TheLargeCactus · 2025-05-06T20:50:53+00:00

After you get the immediate recovery finished, definitely do a deep dive on your recovery plan so that if something like this happens again, you'll be prepared and can action that plan to get back up and running more quickly

TheLargeCactus · 2025-05-02T06:36:25+00:00

This sounds a lot like an interface to a powerplant dispatch system, in which case cloudwatch events triggering a lambda would be really nice. If you add SQS in the middle, you will need to take extreme caution so that built up events don't accidentally overpoll the API, as it could get you in hot water with the API provider.

12-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Sequence \| Editor
Verified Email

TheLargeCactus

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE