<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Cost-Optimization on GeekyRyan</title><link>https://rnemeth90.github.io/tags/cost-optimization/</link><description>Recent content in Cost-Optimization on GeekyRyan</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2023 09:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://rnemeth90.github.io/tags/cost-optimization/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Rolling Out New AKS Clusters to Retire Duplicate Infrastructure</title><link>https://rnemeth90.github.io/projects/2023-03-21-rolling-out-new-aks-clusters/</link><pubDate>Tue, 21 Mar 2023 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://rnemeth90.github.io/projects/2023-03-21-rolling-out-new-aks-clusters/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;Over time, infrastructure accumulates cruft - clusters stood up for a specific purpose that never got cleaned up, duplicate environments left over from a migration, that sort of thing. This project stood up a new generation of AKS clusters specifically so we could decommission an older, duplicate set of infrastructure that was quietly costing money every month.&lt;/p&gt;&#10;&lt;p&gt;The approach was straightforward: build the new clusters alongside the old ones, migrate workloads over, validate, and then tear down the legacy infrastructure. Running both environments in parallel for a short overlap period had a real (if temporary) cost - a few thousand dollars over a couple of months - but it bought us a safe cutover with a rollback path, which was worth it compared to the ongoing cost of carrying duplicate infrastructure indefinitely.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>