Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Considered adding a Serverless version of the OpenSearch service? #171

Open
fankaibo opened this issue Feb 5, 2025 · 2 comments
Open

Considered adding a Serverless version of the OpenSearch service? #171

fankaibo opened this issue Feb 5, 2025 · 2 comments

Comments

@fankaibo
Copy link

fankaibo commented Feb 5, 2025

I have read the complete introduction of v0.2.5. I saw that even if I don't use it, there will be a fee of $100/month.
This fee is incurred when the node of OpenSearchService is running.
For users who only want to use it in meetings (maybe 10 meetings per month, 1-2 hours per meeting), $100 is a relatively high cost.

Is it possible to add a Serverless version option to the OpenSearch service to further reduce the cost?

@fankaibo fankaibo changed the title Have you considered adding a Serverless version of the OpenSearch service? Considered adding a Serverless version of the OpenSearch service? Feb 5, 2025
@rstrahan
Copy link
Contributor

rstrahan commented Feb 5, 2025

Hi,
LMA uses the QnABot to power the meeting assistant.. See https://github.com/aws-solutions/qnabot-on-aws
For enterprises with many users, the opensearch cost is shared across all users, and so it's not so much of an issue.
However, I agree this is a good request.. In fact I think QnABot should not only support serverless OpenSearch, but ideally be able to share an instance with Bedrock Knowledge base, so that when both are provisioned they can share the same OpenSearch to save on cost. Can you create a new feature request in the QnABot repo for this, and cross link it with this one.. Thanks!

@fankaibo
Copy link
Author

fankaibo commented Feb 6, 2025

aws-solutions/qnabot-on-aws#802 (comment)

I have created a corresponding Issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants