Docker, self-hosting and backups · Build
Managed service or your own instance: the full price of each
We price a managed service against your own instance, backups, failover and upkeep included. Self-hosting one database saved about $27,000 a year, we estimate.
EngagementHourly · remote
Hours9–18 CET · 4 h overlap
StackContainers · EC2 · EBS
Proof1 case study
The service in 4 parts
01 · Who it’s for
A team that pays for a managed database and wonders whether its own instance would be cheaper. Or a team that already self-hosts and isn’t sure what a restore would bring back.
02 · What we’ve built
- InfluxDB on our own EC2 instance instead of the managed service, for an analytics layer. By our estimate it saved roughly $27,000 a year while storage made up 95% of the managed bill, and it stayed cheaper after a retention change because the managed service charges per query.Blog post →
- Serverless WebSockets priced against a server of your own across eighteen scenarios. The crossover against one server came before a thousand users, and against a redundant pair before five thousand.Blog post →
- A US marketplace began on shared hosting and ended up on containers with autoscaling, and the product stayed up throughout.Case study 04 →
03 · How we work
01 · METERS FIRSTWe find out which meter dominates the bill before choosing an architecture. On our analytics layer we did it the other way round and spent two years unable to say which of four meters we were paying for.
02 · RUNNING COSTSBackups, patching, upgrades and failover get a price next to the invoice, because none of them appear on it.
03 · TESTED RESTORESA backup counts only once we have tested a restore from it.
04 · Stack
ContainersEC2EBSsnapshotsS3CloudWatchInfluxDB
Proof
Where we’ve done this before
WritingSelf-hosted InfluxDB stayed cheaper because of per-query pricingInfluxDB on our own EC2 instance instead of the managed service, for an analytics layer. By our estimate it saved roughly $27,000 a year while storage made up 95% of the managed bill, and it stayed cheaper after a retention change because the managed service charges per query.Read the post →WritingServerless WebSocket costs: connection minutes rarely dominateServerless WebSockets priced against a server of your own across eighteen scenarios. The crossover against one server came before a thousand users, and against a redundant pair before five thousand.Read the post →Case study 04 · MarketplaceZero outagesA US marketplace began on shared hosting and ended up on containers with autoscaling, and the product stayed up throughout.Read the case study →
FAQ
Questions about this service
No. If both options cost under about $200 a month, take the managed version with backups and a support line, because the difference is smaller than the time you would spend on it. Self-hosting pays off when your customers read their own data and per-query pricing grows with every one of them.
Usually the last part of availability. The setup in our write-up was an active-passive pair on one shared volume. It survives an instance dying but not the loss of the volume or the zone, and it gave about 80% of the availability for about 3% of the price.
Maintenance, upgrades and on-call. If nobody on your team already patches instances and tests restores, self-hosting doesn’t save money. It gives someone a new job.
No. It is our estimate, from US East list prices in mid-2026 and our own usage, and it leaves out maintenance and on-call.
Next step
Describe the problem and we’ll come back with three options.
The first call takes 30 minutes, and you’re under no obligation.