This message was deleted.

Hey Minh, we do not support mixing and matching self-hosted and cloud.

Thank you for your response. I would like to inquire if there are any plans to implement the feature of self-hosting the compute-heavy part such as recording, as some other cloud products offer this functionality. In my opinion, this would be a valuable addition. Additionally, it may be beneficial for the egress service to communicate with the Livekit server through API instead of Redis, which would allow for deployment of the egress service to different providers on different locations.

we do not have any plans to do this.

@bored-thailand-45689 I’m curious on your use case and why you’d like to self-host the compute heavy part of your workflow? Is there a particular thing you’re trying to do that Cloud Egress doesn’t support?

The main reason for this is to optimize costs, and the second reason is due to the cloud egress limit on concurrent recording. I am planning to migrate our main feature to utilize Livekit, which relies on numerous small concurrent rooms (1-1).

Hey @bored-thailand-45689, we can def. help with limits! feel free to request an increase in the cloud portal and we'll approve it. I can understand the cost concerns as well. Do you mind sharing with us your use case in a bit more detail? If we are able to right-size your workload, we'd be happy to pass those savings onto you. CC: @bright-scooter-10854 to follow up.

Yeah, we are still considering and will request an increase the limit. We are currently use Livekit for some features without recording. However, moving our main feature to Livekit would result in a threefold increase in recording costs. FYI: we are providing a platform for practice speaking English with foreigners

Hey @bored-thailand-45689 I'll send you a DM. Happy to discuss things further