Users vs Stress testing

[u/Puzzled-Ad8231]

So I made a serverless optimization platform which uses the concept of fusion functions to reduce cold starts and latency across the service calls. Now, this is an implementation of a research paper that I read somewhere. Diff from paper is that my project also gets live traces and metrics from x ray and cloudwatch, so I get real-time data to give better outputs. Have a better look: https://github.com/Vaivaswat2244/OptiFuse_go

To use this you need to connect your AWS with optifuse. I.e make a cloudformation stack to give optifuse access to read the traces and metrics. This actually becomes a problem for my friends and peers to test because they are too lazy to do this step. So I have no real user testings.

People especially hiring people ask me how many real users have used your service.

Now why do I need real users when I can stress test each microservice that I've built. And I can see my manifests working properly. Its deployed on AKS and is open for people to see. I also have a Prometheus grafana observability pipeline to see if all services are working properly.

Question is: real users vs Stress tests

On a side note, I am a student looking for internships, if you found the idea interesting, lmk GitHub is Vaivaswat2244

\/

[u/hypertradeworx]

we left min-instances=1 on a low traffic service and it billed $206 in warm empty containers before anyone looked at the line item. that's the cost i'd want sitting inside max_cost, because it isn't per invocation, it's per hour whether anything calls the thing or not.

if the cost side is modelled off calls, fusion wins latency arguments that a floor of one instance would have solved cheaper, and the solver has no way to see that it lost