> So much for the folks defending these three companies that refused to provide hard spending cap ("but you can set the budget", "you are doing it wrong if you worry about billing", "hard cap it's technically impossible" etc.)

Yes, it's technically+business impossible. To implement a hard cap, a bill never to go over, they'd have to cut your service, but also delete all your data in databases, object storage, data lake, etc. This is simply not an option, so they take the different option of authorising support to wave surprise surcharges / billing DDoSes.

You can have a hard cap on compute spend while letting storage go over. Surprise huge bills are approximately never due to storage.

This argument simply doesn't hold water - their (smaller) competition solved this problem over a decade ago.

Srsly?

The mighty cloud provider can't solve this issue?

Google has second precision billing on compute.

Its not hard to define a base layer of allowed billing increase and adding this type of context to resource allocation.

You are not just suddenly creating a mlllion terabytes of data or a million db requests without supervision.

It could even be as simple as basic level caps like 100 euro / month, 1000, 10.000 etc.

And there is a difference between stoping everything before the spike happens vs. also deleting stuff.