Best Practices for Spot Instance Interruption Recovery

Spot instances can save up to 90% on cloud costs, but they come with a trade-off: they can be terminated at short notice. To make the most of these savings without risking reliability, you need systems designed to handle interruptions seamlessly. Here's how:

• Use external storage: Store critical data outside of local instances to prevent loss during interruptions.
• Automate recovery: Tools like AWS Auto Scaling Groups or Kubernetes autoscalers can replace interrupted capacity automatically.
• Plan for interruptions: Treat interruptions as routine. Use checkpointing for long-running tasks, idempotent operations for retries, and stateless designs for flexibility.
• Monitor and test: Regularly simulate interruptions and track recovery times to ensure your systems handle disruptions effectively.
• Customise for workload types: Batch jobs, containerised apps, and databases each require tailored interruption strategies.

With the right setup, you can confidently use spot instances for production workloads, balancing cost savings with reliability.

AWS EC2 Spot Usage | Real-life Examples | Three Common Patterns to Handle Interruption

Core Principles of Recovery-Oriented Spot Architectures

When designing systems that rely on spot instances, interruptions should be treated as an expected part of operations, not as rare failures. A well-thought-out architecture ensures these interruptions are managed seamlessly. Three key principles form the backbone of such systems: stateless design with external state storage, idempotent operations with reliable retry mechanisms, and checkpointing for long-running tasks. These principles empower organisations in the UK to confidently leverage spot capacity, knowing their systems can recover automatically with minimal disruption. Let’s dive into how each principle contributes to building resilient systems.

Stateless Design and External State Storage

A stateless service processes each request independently, avoiding any reliance on local storage or in-memory data. This means that when a spot instance is reclaimed, the service can restart on a new instance without losing critical information or needing complex recovery processes. This is a cornerstone of handling interruptions effectively.

To achieve this, all mutable data should be stored externally, and configurations should be passed through environment variables or service discovery mechanisms. Here’s how to handle different types of data:

• Transactional data: Key information like customer orders, user profiles, or payment records should reside in managed databases such as RDS, Aurora, or DynamoDB. These services ensure durability and consistency, independent of spot instance lifecycles.
• Asynchronous workloads: Use durable message queues or streaming platforms. For example, if a spot instance processing a message is interrupted, the message remains in the queue, ready for another instance to pick up where the previous one left off.
• Large files and logs: Store these in object storage solutions like S3. This ensures that artefacts, processed files, or analytics results are preserved even if an instance is terminated. This approach is crucial for CI/CD pipelines and batch jobs, where losing intermediate results can be costly.
• Ephemeral data: Temporary data, such as cache entries or session tokens, can be stored in managed caches like Redis or ElastiCache. Since this data is short-lived, losing it during an interruption won’t compromise the application’s integrity.

By separating concerns and ensuring no single instance holds irreplaceable data, your system becomes both more resilient and easier to scale.

Idempotency and Retry Mechanisms

Externalising state is only part of the equation. To ensure consistency during retries, operations must be idempotent - meaning they produce the same result regardless of how many times they are executed. This is especially important when spot instances are interrupted mid-operation, potentially causing retries that could lead to duplicate records or corrupted states.

Here’s how to implement idempotency effectively:

• Use unique identifiers and conditional writes. For instance, a unique constraint on a database column like a payment ID prevents duplicate entries, even if an operation is retried.
• Leverage features like DynamoDB’s conditional writes or similar tools in other databases to ensure retries don’t result in unintended side effects.

At an infrastructure level, idempotent API calls are crucial for automation tasks like removing instances from load balancers or updating auto-scaling groups. These calls should include exponential backoff and retries to handle transient failures without overwhelming systems. A typical retry pattern starts with a delay of 100–200 milliseconds and doubles with each attempt, up to a maximum of 10–30 seconds. Adding random jitter prevents simultaneous retries from multiple clients, reducing the risk of service overload.

For user-facing requests, retries should respect overall SLAs. For example, if a response must be delivered within two seconds, downstream calls should have shorter timeouts (e.g., 200–500 milliseconds) with limited retries. For infrastructure tasks responding to spot interruptions, slightly longer backoff windows are acceptable, as these actions - like deregistering instances - aren’t latency-sensitive but must complete within the two-minute spot warning window.

By fine-tuning retry mechanisms, you can balance the risk of excessive retries (and their associated costs) with the need to maintain system reliability during interruptions.

Checkpointing for Long-Running Tasks

While short-lived tasks can often be retried from scratch, long-running jobs like data processing, analytics, or machine learning training require a more efficient approach. Restarting these jobs from the beginning after every interruption would be both time-consuming and expensive. That’s where checkpointing comes in.

Checkpointing involves periodically saving a job’s progress to durable storage. If a spot instance is interrupted, the job can resume from the last checkpoint rather than starting over. The frequency of these checkpoints is a trade-off: more frequent checkpoints reduce rework but increase I/O and storage costs, while less frequent checkpoints lower overhead but risk losing more progress.

Here’s how checkpointing can be applied to different workloads:

• Data processing pipelines: Store offsets, processed file lists, or partition markers in a database or object storage. Intermediate results should also be saved to object storage, ensuring the job can resume efficiently.
• HPC or scientific workloads: Use tools that create memory or state snapshots, storing them in shared storage for fine-grained recovery.
• Machine learning training: Save model weights, optimiser states, learning rate schedules, and the current epoch or batch index. This allows training to resume with minimal impact on convergence.

The two-minute interruption notice provided by cloud providers is an excellent opportunity to perform a final checkpoint, ensuring that the maximum amount of lost work is limited to the time since the last save.

What you include in each checkpoint depends on the workload. For example:

• Analytics and ETL jobs: Capture the current input offset, processed file lists, and references to intermediate artefacts.
• Media processing pipelines: Track encoded segments, current positions in files, and references to completed chunks.
• Machine learning training: Save all relevant model and training state data, ensuring resumption is smooth even after interruptions.

Including a versioned schema or configuration snapshot in the checkpoint ensures compatibility if code changes between interruption and resumption. This way, the resumed job can adapt safely or fail fast, avoiding data corruption.

Detecting and Responding to Interruption Signals

Quickly identifying and responding to interruption signals can mean the difference between a smooth recovery and a disruptive service outage. Cloud providers often send advance warnings, offering a brief window to take action.

Automating Responses to Interruption Notices

Major cloud providers offer tools to detect when spot instances are about to be reclaimed. For example:

• AWS EC2 Spot Instances: Provide a 2-minute interruption notice via the instance metadata service at http://169.254.169.254/latest/meta-data/spot/instance-action. They also publish EC2 Spot Instance Interruption Warning events to CloudWatch Events and EventBridge [3][6].
• Azure Spot VMs: Use the Scheduled Events API to signal evictions, typically giving a 30-second warning through a Terminate event.
• GCP Spot VMs: Use shutdown scripts to manage graceful stops, with preemption notices delivered via the metadata server.

A reliable strategy combines in-instance detection with external event handling. For instance, a lightweight agent can poll the metadata endpoint every 5–10 seconds to detect interruptions quickly. Once detected, this agent can trigger local shutdown actions. Simultaneously, external event systems like AWS EventBridge, Azure Event Grid, or GCP Cloud Pub/Sub can coordinate centralised actions across multiple instances [2][3]. This two-pronged approach strengthens resilience, especially in stateless architectures.

This strategy is particularly useful for UK-based teams running workloads in regions like eu-west-2, where multiple instances might face simultaneous interruptions. External automation can assess the scale of the impact across availability zones and initiate replacement capacity, while local agents ensure clean shutdowns for individual instances.

For AWS, automation often involves EventBridge rules to detect spot interruption events. These rules can trigger Lambda functions to tag interrupted instances (e.g., spot=terminating), call Auto Scaling APIs to replace capacity, adjust Karpenter provisioner settings, and deregister instances from load balancer target groups using the ELBv2 API [1][2][3]. Such workflows are typically managed as infrastructure-as-code, using tools like Terraform, and should be tested regularly in non-production environments.

Azure users can employ Azure Monitor or Event Grid to trigger Azure Functions or Automation Runbooks. These tools can handle VM scale set actions, drain instances from Azure Load Balancer or Application Gateway, and save any essential state within the 30-second notice period.

For GCP, automation often relies on daemons running on each VM to monitor metadata for maintenance-event keys. Cloud Functions or Cloud Run services, triggered by Pub/Sub notifications, can then orchestrate backend actions like updating managed instance groups and draining instances from Google Cloud Load Balancing.

AWS also provides a rebalance recommendation signal, which warns of elevated interruption risks before an actual termination notice. This proactive signal allows teams to launch replacement capacity early, minimising potential disruptions [4][5].

These automated processes lay the groundwork for a controlled shutdown, which is explored further in the next section.

Graceful Shutdown and Draining

When an interruption signal is received, the first priority is to prevent new tasks from being assigned to the affected node or VM. For Kubernetes workloads, this involves marking the node as unschedulable using the kubectl cordon command. Non-Kubernetes workloads can achieve similar results by updating a service registry or configuration to remove the instance from the active pool [1].

In Kubernetes, Pod lifecycle hooks - especially the preStop hook - are invaluable. This hook runs before a container receives a SIGTERM signal, allowing applications to perform critical tasks like draining connections, flushing queues, or saving final checkpoints. For instance, a preStop hook might signal an application to stop accepting new requests, wait for ongoing requests to finish, and then save any buffered data to external storage [1]. The terminationGracePeriodSeconds setting ensures Kubernetes provides enough time for these steps to complete. On AWS, this should be configured to allow the entire shutdown process to finish within 90–100 seconds, leaving a safety buffer.

The kubectl drain command can then be used to evict all pods from an interrupted node while respecting Pod Disruption Budgets. Many organisations automate this process with a DaemonSet or node-termination handler that listens for spot interruption signals and immediately cordons and drains the node [1][3].

For non-Kubernetes workloads, systemd ExecStop scripts or custom shutdown handlers can achieve similar results. These scripts can close database connections, complete in-flight requests, and move transient data to durable storage. In industries like finance, where uptime is critical, these processes must be carefully timed and monitored to ensure they finish before the instance is forcibly terminated [1][4].

Regular testing is essential to validate these procedures. Tools like AWS Fault Injection Simulator can simulate spot interruptions, helping teams confirm that detection, draining, and shutdown processes work within the available window [2][4]. Chaos experiments across various components - such as application servers, batch workers, and Kubernetes nodes - can uncover weaknesses in shutdown logic and allow teams to address them before real outages occur.

After ensuring a graceful shutdown, it’s vital to deregister instances from load balancers to prevent traffic from being routed to nodes that are about to terminate.

Integration with Load Balancers

Deregistering instances from load balancers is a critical step to avoid service disruptions during shutdown. If an instance continues to receive traffic while shutting down, users may experience failed requests or timeouts.

For AWS, an EventBridge-triggered Lambda function can call the ELBv2 API to deregister targets from relevant load balancer groups. Alternatively, an in-instance agent can perform the same API call locally. Configuring a deregistration delay of 60–120 seconds for Application Load Balancers and Network Load Balancers ensures long-lived requests have time to complete before the instance shuts down [3]. For UK-facing services, such as those handling financial transactions or media streaming, these settings should align with typical request durations.

Azure workloads can use APIs or CLI commands through automation runbooks or VM extensions to remove VMs from backend pools in Azure Load Balancer or Application Gateway. Health probes can also ensure that draining VMs fail health checks and are removed from rotation automatically if explicit deregistration doesn’t occur.

On GCP, backend services or instance group memberships can be updated using Cloud Functions or similar tools. Connection draining settings and health checks should be configured to quickly mark preempted VMs as unhealthy, stopping them from receiving new traffic.

While many managed load balancers rely on health checks to identify unhealthy or draining targets, explicit deregistration ensures that the limited interruption window is used effectively [3][5].

For Kubernetes services, integration with load balancers works slightly differently. Pods should leverage readiness and liveness probes. When a preStop hook runs, the readiness probe should return a non-OK status, signalling the Kubernetes service to remove the pod from active rotation.

Recovery Strategies for Different Workload Types

Building on basic recovery principles, tailoring strategies to specific workload types can strengthen resilience. Customising recovery approaches ensures that the cost savings of spot instances are not offset by service interruptions. Different workloads respond differently to spot instance interruptions. For example, while batch jobs can tolerate brief pauses, a primary database cannot afford even a short disruption.

Batch and Analytics Workloads

Batch and analytics workloads - like data pipelines, ETL processes, machine learning training, and large-scale analytics - are generally more tolerant of interruptions. These tasks can recover effectively if progress is saved regularly.

To manage these workloads, design tasks to be stateless and idempotent. Each task should read input from external storage, process the data, and write results back to durable storage. This ensures that interrupted tasks can restart without duplicating work or corrupting data [3][5].

For batch workloads, setting checkpoint intervals of 5–15 minutes strikes a balance between overhead and recovery efficiency. When a spot interruption notice is received, using the two-minute warning to create a final checkpoint ensures progress is not lost [3][4].

Using distributed engines like Apache Spark or Flink, which offer built-in checkpoint and savepoint mechanisms, can further improve recovery. Custom processes can also persist progress markers, queue offsets, or partial outputs. Workflow engines like AWS Batch, managed Apache Airflow, or Kubernetes Jobs/CronJobs are vital for tracking job states and re-queuing interrupted tasks automatically [3].

To ensure quick replacement capacity, batch workloads should run in Auto Scaling Groups or Spot Fleets with a capacity-optimised allocation strategy, diversified across multiple instance types and availability zones [3][5][7]. For long-running tasks, breaking them into smaller subtasks reduces the cost of restarting large jobs after interruptions [3][4].

Containerised and Kubernetes Workloads

Kubernetes and containerised environments are well-suited to handle spot interruptions if configured correctly. The aim is to reschedule pods promptly when a spot-backed node is reclaimed, minimising service disruption.

A common approach involves using mixed node pools - spot nodes for cost-sensitive workloads and on-demand nodes for critical services. Label nodes by capacity type, such as capacity=spot or capacity=ondemand, and use taints and tolerations to manage pod placement. For example, applying a taint like spot=true:NoSchedule to spot nodes and adding tolerations to pods designed for spot use (e.g., batch jobs or non-critical microservices) helps maintain balance [1].

Node affinity can further optimise cost-sensitive pods for spot nodes, while critical or stateful pods are restricted to reliable pools using anti-affinity settings [1].

When a spot interruption notice is received, cordon and drain the affected node. Pod Disruption Budgets (PDBs) limit the number of replicas disrupted at one time, while preStop hooks allow for graceful shutdown tasks like closing database connections or flushing logs. These actions should be completed within the notice period [1].

Tools like Cluster Autoscaler or Karpenter ensure that when a spot node is terminated, the cluster automatically provisions new nodes - ideally diversified spot instances with an on-demand fallback - and reschedules pending pods.

For UK deployments needing predictable capacity, such as trading systems during London market hours, combining spot-backed nodes for background tasks with on-demand nodes for customer-facing services is advisable. Node labels and affinity ensure tolerant workloads run on spot nodes. Storing critical state on Persistent Volumes and using storage classes that support dynamic provisioning enable faster recovery.

Stateful Services and Databases

Stateful services and databases pose unique challenges when using spot capacity, as preserving data integrity is paramount. A failure involving a node holding critical data or serving as a primary database can lead to significant data loss or outages. For this reason, it's generally recommended to avoid running primary or leader nodes directly on spot instances [5][7].

Instead, run primary nodes on managed or on-demand instances, reserving spot capacity for replicas, read-only nodes, or caches. Ensure replication spans multiple availability zones and store data on durable external volumes [5][7].

For systems with leader election mechanisms - like Kafka, Elasticsearch, or self-managed databases - quorum-critical nodes (e.g., controllers or master-eligible nodes) should operate on reliable capacity, while follower nodes can use spot instances [5]. Built-in leader election tools (e.g., ZooKeeper, Raft, or distributed locking via etcd/Consul) ensure that losing a spot-backed follower triggers automatic rebalancing without affecting quorum [3].

In UK deployments, spreading leader nodes across multiple AZs within the same region helps maintain availability during AZ-level or spot-capacity fluctuations. Load balancers, DNS, or service discovery systems must update quickly when leadership changes, ensuring clients reconnect to the new leader automatically [3][4].

Designs should enable swift reattachment of volumes to replacement nodes. For stateful Kubernetes workloads, PersistentVolumeClaims should use storage classes supporting dynamic provisioning and fast reattachment. Regular backups to durable object storage are essential for minimising recovery point objectives (RPO) and recovery time objectives (RTO) in case of correlated spot failures [1][4][6][7].

Monitoring and Fault Injection

Monitoring and fault injection are essential for testing recovery strategies. For batch workloads, track metrics like job success rates, restart counts, and checkpoint durations. For containerised workloads, monitor pod eviction counts, rescheduling times, and service-level indicators during interruptions. For stateful services, focus on replica health, replication lag, and failover times [1][3][4][7]. Regular monitoring combined with fault injection ensures systems can handle interruptions consistently and maintain service reliability.

Operational Practices for Spot Resilience

When working with spot instances, interruptions should be treated as a normal part of operations. The aim is to ensure service availability, keep recovery times consistent, and optimise cost savings without taking on unnecessary risks. This requires building systems that assume capacity will be reclaimed and can respond automatically without human intervention.

Automated Capacity Recovery

A key part of managing spot resilience is automating the replacement of interrupted instances. EC2 Auto Scaling Groups are the go-to tool for this purpose.

To reduce the chance of correlated interruptions, configure Auto Scaling Groups with mixed instance policies that span multiple instance families and Availability Zones (AZs). This diversification allows the autoscaler to pull from other pools if one becomes constrained. AWS advises using the capacity-optimised or capacity-optimised-prioritised allocation strategies, which prioritise pools with the most available capacity over chasing the lowest price. This approach helps minimise interruptions while still offering considerable savings compared to on-demand pricing [3][5].

Enable capacity rebalancing in your Auto Scaling Groups. This feature allows the autoscaler to act on AWS’s rebalance recommendations - signals that a spot instance is at higher risk of interruption - by launching replacement instances before the two-minute termination notice arrives [3][5].

For Kubernetes environments, tools like Cluster Autoscaler or Karpenter can automatically add new nodes when spot-backed nodes are terminated, ensuring workloads are rescheduled quickly [1].

To manage costs, set clear fallback rules. Mixed-instance policies can combine a reliable baseline of on-demand instances with spot instances for additional capacity. Define limits on how many on-demand instances can launch during spot shortages, and use CloudWatch alerts to track on-demand spending (£ per hour) against expected thresholds. Regular reviews of usage and spending data ensure that recovery mechanisms remain aligned with budgets and cost goals [3][5][7].

For critical services, especially those with specific time-sensitive requirements like London market hours, striking a balance between a small on-demand baseline and diversified spot capacity can deliver both reliability and cost efficiency.

Once these automated mechanisms are in place, it’s essential to validate them through rigorous testing.

Fault Injection and Testing

Testing recovery processes is a must. AWS recommends validating how workloads handle not only the standard two-minute interruption notice but also sudden, unannounced instance losses [4].

Using the AWS Fault Injection Simulator, teams can conduct chaos experiments that replicate spot interruptions. This tool allows you to terminate or stop a percentage of instances in an Auto Scaling Group or Kubernetes node group, simulate network latency, or even trigger Availability Zone failures. These tests ensure the resilience of the entire system, not just individual components [2][4].

Begin testing in non-production environments and gradually move to controlled experiments in production during low-traffic periods. Define success criteria beforehand, such as recovering within five minutes. These tests should confirm that lifecycle hooks, preStop hooks, checkpointing mechanisms, and autoscaling all function as expected [2][4].

Test scenarios should include both straightforward and complex failure modes: single instance interruptions, simultaneous interruptions across an instance family or AZ, delays in replacement capacity, misconfigured health checks, and automation failures like throttled AWS APIs or broken IAM roles [2][3][4].

For Kubernetes workloads, test how mass eviction of spot nodes interacts with Pod Disruption Budgets, draining latency, and Horizontal Pod Autoscalers. For batch and analytics jobs, confirm that orchestration tools resume from the last checkpoint rather than starting over [1][3].

Incorporate these drills into regular game days and run chaos experiments with each major release. Track metrics like job completion rates, average recovery times, and the financial impact (£) during testing to quantify resilience.

Thorough testing lays the groundwork for effective monitoring, which is essential for managing spot workloads.

Monitoring and Metrics for Spot Workloads

Monitoring is crucial for managing spot capacity with the same precision as any production system. Keep an eye on both technical and financial metrics to ensure resilience mechanisms are delivering value.

Interruption-related metrics are a core focus. Track the daily or weekly number and rate of spot interruptions, broken down by instance type and AZ. Measure the time it takes to recover capacity - from the interruption notice to a replacement instance becoming healthy - and the time to restore service health, such as error rates returning to normal or queue depths clearing [3][5].

Monitor how many workloads are successfully drained before termination. For batch jobs, this means tracking tasks that completed checkpointing versus those lost. For web services, it involves measuring whether connections closed gracefully and traffic was redirected without errors [2][3][4].

Set up alerts to capture interruption notices and rebalance recommendations. For Kubernetes, monitor pod evictions, node not ready events, and retries on spot nodes [1][3][4].

Create dashboards to compare spot versus on-demand spending over time in £. Track per-job costs to quantify savings. This financial visibility helps engineering and finance teams stay aligned on cost targets while managing risk [3][7].

Design alerts to focus on symptoms rather than events. Instead of triggering notifications for every interruption, alert on patterns like rising failed requests, extended job queue times, or repeated failures to secure replacement capacity within a set timeframe (e.g., five to ten minutes). Use interruption metrics for informational alerts, while service-level objectives define acceptable ranges for interruption frequency and recovery time [3][4][5].

Ensure monitoring is aligned with local time zones and support hours. Alert thresholds should be fine-tuned based on data from fault-injection tests and real incidents. This prevents unnecessary disruptions to engineers while ensuring critical issues are addressed promptly.

Maintain detailed runbooks for scenarios like regional spot unavailability, persistent fallback to on-demand capacity, or job deadlines at risk due to repeated interruptions. These should include steps to temporarily pin critical services to on-demand, adjust Auto Scaling settings, throttle non-critical workloads, and communicate updates to stakeholders [3][5].

Finally, establish a feedback loop. Use data from monitoring, incident reviews, and cost reports to guide architectural and configuration changes. Schedule regular spot reviews (e.g., quarterly) with engineering, SRE, and finance teams to analyse trends, recovery performance, and savings. These reviews help identify areas for improvement and ensure ongoing alignment between cost efficiency and resilience [3][5][7].

For organisations looking to refine their spot instance strategies, Hokstad Consulting offers tailored services in cloud cost management and DevOps. Their expertise includes reviewing Auto Scaling configurations, designing chaos experiments with safety constraints, building cost dashboards for UK businesses, and coaching teams in FinOps practices. By combining technical know-how with financial discipline, they help teams achieve substantial cloud savings - often 30–50% - while maintaining reliability.

Conclusion

Balancing Cost Savings with Reliability

Spot instances can slash cloud costs by 30–50% compared to on-demand pricing, but achieving these savings without compromising reliability requires careful planning. This guide has outlined strategies to build fault-tolerant architectures: externalise state, ensure idempotency with robust retries, and use checkpointing to resume long-running tasks rather than restarting them. On the infrastructure side, diversifying capacity and automating recovery with tools like Auto Scaling Groups or Kubernetes autoscalers is essential. Additionally, automating responses to AWS’s two-minute interruption notices - by draining instances, shutting down gracefully, and quickly replacing capacity - can turn potential disruptions into manageable, routine events.

For UK businesses, whether operating during London market hours or serving customers across multiple time zones, the secret lies in categorising workloads effectively. Tasks like batch processing, analytics, CI/CD pipelines, and fault-tolerant web tiers are ideal for spot instances. On the other hand, user-facing or revenue-critical services benefit from a mixed approach: maintaining a baseline of on-demand or reserved instances while using spot capacity for handling bursts in traffic. Regular chaos testing, along with monitoring interruption rates, recovery times, and monthly spending, ensures that resilience mechanisms are functioning as intended and that engineering and finance teams remain aligned on goals.

AWS’s advice is clear: design applications to be fault-tolerant rather than trying to avoid interruptions entirely [5]. By adopting this mindset and investing in automation, testing, and continuous optimisation, organisations can confidently expand their use of spot instances, reaping the financial benefits without sacrificing the reliability customers expect.

These practices not only unlock savings but also set the stage for successful implementation - an area where expert support can make all the difference.

How Hokstad Consulting Can Help

Hokstad Consulting specialises in helping UK organisations implement interruption-resilient cloud architectures that maximise the cost advantages of spot instances while maintaining reliability. Their expertise spans DevOps transformation, cloud cost optimisation, and strategic cloud migration, making them well-equipped to tackle the challenges of scaling spot usage.

Their approach begins with a thorough review of your AWS environment to identify workloads suited for spot instances. They redesign architectures to externalise state, enforce idempotency, and integrate checkpointing. Hokstad Consulting also configures Auto Scaling Groups, spot fleets, and scheduling policies to leverage diversified spot pools while ensuring compliance with operational standards suited to UK businesses. Automation is a key focus: they integrate tools like Amazon EventBridge and Lambda to handle interruptions seamlessly - triggering node draining, deregistering instances from load balancers, and launching replacements without human intervention.

For Kubernetes and containerised workloads, Hokstad Consulting fine-tunes autoscalers, taints and tolerations, pod disruption budgets, and pre-stop hooks to ensure graceful pod migration when interruptions occur. They also design dashboards and alerts that highlight only exceptional issues, such as repeated failures to secure replacement spot capacity, ensuring operations teams aren’t overwhelmed by routine events that automation can handle. Through chaos experiments using AWS Fault Injection Simulator and custom tools, they validate recovery processes, building trust in the system’s ability to handle real-world conditions.

Hokstad Consulting also establishes a continuous FinOps cycle. They monitor utilisation, interruption patterns, and monthly spending, regularly adjusting instance selections, diversification strategies, and workload placements to maximise savings without breaching reliability thresholds. This includes periodic reviews of instance families and regions, fine-tuning diversification policies, and adapting the balance between spot, on-demand, and reserved capacity as business needs evolve. By integrating these practices into CI/CD pipelines and infrastructure-as-code, they ensure new services are designed to take advantage of spot capacity from the start, embedding cost efficiency and resilience into daily engineering workflows.

Hokstad Consulting’s track record speaks volumes. They’ve helped clients cut infrastructure costs by 30–50%, achieve up to 75% faster deployments, and reduce errors by 90%. Their clients have also seen infrastructure-related downtime drop by 95%. To align their goals with yours, Hokstad Consulting often offers fee structures tied to a percentage of the savings they help you achieve.

For organisations ready to expand their use of spot instances with confidence, Hokstad Consulting brings the technical know-how, automation expertise, and ongoing optimisation practices you need. By adopting these strategies and partnering with experts, your business can enjoy the cost benefits of spot instances while maintaining the reliability your customers depend on. Visit hokstadconsulting.com to find out how they can help your team implement these best practices.

FAQs