[gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Grant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 253 bytes --]

Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud server
from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud server concept is
amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated server at the same price
point far outperforms it.

- Grant

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 295 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Florian Philipp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 725 bytes --]

Am 14.12.2012 08:49, schrieb Grant:
> Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud
> server from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud server
> concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated server at the
> same price point far outperforms it.
> 
> - Grant

Last time I did the calculation, a dedicated or normal virtualized
infrastructure was more cost effective as long as you could accurately
predict the performance you need.

Cloud services only really help if you need a high dynamic range
regarding scale and performance, e.g. a service that could get a lot of
new users very fast or is only really active for short time spans.

Regards,
Florian Philipp


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Grant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 771 bytes --]

> > Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud
> > server from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud server
> > concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated server at the
> > same price point far outperforms it.
> >
> > - Grant
>
> Last time I did the calculation, a dedicated or normal virtualized
> infrastructure was more cost effective as long as you could accurately
> predict the performance you need.
>
> Cloud services only really help if you need a high dynamic range
> regarding scale and performance, e.g. a service that could get a lot of
> new users very fast or is only really active for short time spans.

Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability
compared to dedicated?

- Grant

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 926 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Bruce Hill]

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:49:23PM -0800, Grant wrote:
> Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud server
> from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud server concept is
> amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated server at the same price
> point far outperforms it.
> 
> - Grant

My data is allergic to "the cloud" ... too much pixey dust.
-- 
Happy Penguin Computers               >')
126 Fenco Drive                       ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801                       ^^
support@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/

Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 06:39:03 -0600
Bruce Hill <daddy@happypenguincomputers.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:49:23PM -0800, Grant wrote:
> > Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud
> > server from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud
> > server concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated
> > server at the same price point far outperforms it.
> > 
> > - Grant
> 
> My data is allergic to "the cloud" ... too much pixey dust.

If I get up from my desk, walk down the corridor and turn right, I find
myself right in the middle of a technical team that built and delivers
cloud.

I do not use cloud.

This is not a co-incidence.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Alan McKinnon]

On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 02:00:54 -0800
Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:

> > > Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud
> > > server from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud
> > > server concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated
> > > server at the same price point far outperforms it.
> > >
> > > - Grant
> >
> > Last time I did the calculation, a dedicated or normal virtualized
> > infrastructure was more cost effective as long as you could
> > accurately predict the performance you need.
> >
> > Cloud services only really help if you need a high dynamic range
> > regarding scale and performance, e.g. a service that could get a
> > lot of new users very fast or is only really active for short time
> > spans.
> 
> Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability
> compared to dedicated?

Potentially? Yes.

In reality? No.

It's not the virtualization that breaks, it's all the surrounding
infrastructure, especially Layer 2. You will not believe how fragile
that stuff can get.

In the old days, a small slip up could isolate a small part of the
network. These days, a small slip-up easily ripples though the entire
network and takes down all of it, and sadly this is not rare. The
networking needs of VMs are radically different from the traditional,
and this is the side-effect: fragility.


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Kevin Chadwick]

> Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability
> compared to dedicated?

Perhaps at your price point through redundancy which could be applied
to dedicated all be it at higher cost and so potentially still more
reliable and certainly more secure and also tested in almost any case
(lookup the paper about timing attacks on amazon services etc.).

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________

'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a
universal interface'

(Doug McIlroy)
_______________________________________________________________________

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Bruce Hill]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 03:19:58PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Dec 2012 06:39:03 -0600
> Bruce Hill <daddy@happypenguincomputers.com> wrote:
> > 
> > My data is allergic to "the cloud" ... too much pixey dust.
> 
> If I get up from my desk, walk down the corridor and turn right, I find
> myself right in the middle of a technical team that built and delivers
> cloud.
> 
> I do not use cloud.
> 
> This is not a co-incidence.

We have reached common ground...thanks for the note.

Or as another once said, "Great minds think alike."  ;)
-- 
Happy Penguin Computers               >')
126 Fenco Drive                       ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801                       ^^
support@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/

Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Bruce Hill]

On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 03:24:03PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > 
> > Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability
> > compared to dedicated?
> 
> Potentially? Yes.
> 
> In reality? No.
> 
> It's not the virtualization that breaks, it's all the surrounding
> infrastructure, especially Layer 2. You will not believe how fragile
> that stuff can get.
> 
> In the old days, a small slip up could isolate a small part of the
> network. These days, a small slip-up easily ripples though the entire
> network and takes down all of it, and sadly this is not rare. The
> networking needs of VMs are radically different from the traditional,
> and this is the side-effect: fragility.

And it happens *every* day, all over the place.

Yesterday I went to Coburn's Supply to get a box of air filters for our HVAC
units. They "couldn't get in". One guy says, "I'm on the internet, don't know
what's wrong". The other guy says, "It's _them_ ..." So they couldn't even
tell me the price of the filters, or if they had them. So one guy walks in the
back and does it the "old fashioned way" -- he just looks. (Reminds me a bit
of sneakernet.) By the time he gets back, and tries again, "Hey, it's working
now ... quick!"

Welcome to the cloud. Your packet has reached critical mass. Please reboot.
-- 
Happy Penguin Computers               >')
126 Fenco Drive                       ( \
Tupelo, MS 38801                       ^^
support@happypenguincomputers.com
662-269-2706 662-205-6424
http://happypenguincomputers.com/

Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Florian Philipp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1212 bytes --]

Am 14.12.2012 11:00, schrieb Grant:
>> > Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud
>> > server from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud server
>> > concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated server at the
>> > same price point far outperforms it.
>> >
>> > - Grant
>>
>> Last time I did the calculation, a dedicated or normal virtualized
>> infrastructure was more cost effective as long as you could accurately
>> predict the performance you need.
>>
>> Cloud services only really help if you need a high dynamic range
>> regarding scale and performance, e.g. a service that could get a lot of
>> new users very fast or is only really active for short time spans.
> 
> Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability
> compared to dedicated?
> 
> - Grant

I'd be grateful if anyone can point me at a well conducted study on that
topic. Until then I just say that my anecdotal evidence shows the
opposite: My cheap-ass virtual server has an uptime of 492 days with
only minor, previously announced network outages. During the same time,
Amazon EC2 had what, 3 or 4 major outages?

Regards,
Florian Philipp


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Kevin Brandstatter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2366 bytes --]

Cloud services are often far more expensive, I work with someone who did a
fair amount of research of the various costs of clouds. They are good for
dynamic scaling of resources but if your concentrating on one server or
another its likely your server load isn't highly intensive and a single
dedicated server could handle it. Also, there are the options of cheaper
webhosting, or a VPS, as a true dedicated server can be quite expensive due
to the cost of rackspace.

In terms of availability, it simply depends on replication and the
reliability of the data site. with a standard cloud server there is likely
not replication across sites and so the availability is determined by
availability of the data center. Dedicated servers dont have multi site
replication (unless you do it yourself), however many provide far better
uptime SLAs than a cloud provider.
For example, Amazon EC2 SLA guaruntees 99.95% uptime. whereas dedicated
servers or VPSs can generally offer between 99,99% and 99.9999% (depending
on who it is).

-Kevin Brandstatter



On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Florian Philipp <lists@binarywings.net>wrote:

> Am 14.12.2012 11:00, schrieb Grant:
> >> > Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud
> >> > server from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud server
> >> > concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated server at the
> >> > same price point far outperforms it.
> >> >
> >> > - Grant
> >>
> >> Last time I did the calculation, a dedicated or normal virtualized
> >> infrastructure was more cost effective as long as you could accurately
> >> predict the performance you need.
> >>
> >> Cloud services only really help if you need a high dynamic range
> >> regarding scale and performance, e.g. a service that could get a lot of
> >> new users very fast or is only really active for short time spans.
> >
> > Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability
> > compared to dedicated?
> >
> > - Grant
>
> I'd be grateful if anyone can point me at a well conducted study on that
> topic. Until then I just say that my anecdotal evidence shows the
> opposite: My cheap-ass virtual server has an uptime of 492 days with
> only minor, previously announced network outages. During the same time,
> Amazon EC2 had what, 3 or 4 major outages?
>
> Regards,
> Florian Philipp
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2983 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] {OT} dedicated server or cloud server?

[Grant]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1810 bytes --]

> > > > Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud
> > > > server from a host with good cloud infrastructure?  The cloud
> > > > server concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated
> > > > server at the same price point far outperforms it.
> > > >
> > > > - Grant
> > >
> > > Last time I did the calculation, a dedicated or normal virtualized
> > > infrastructure was more cost effective as long as you could
> > > accurately predict the performance you need.
> > >
> > > Cloud services only really help if you need a high dynamic range
> > > regarding scale and performance, e.g. a service that could get a
> > > lot of new users very fast or is only really active for short time
> > > spans.
> >
> > Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability
> > compared to dedicated?
>
> Potentially? Yes.
>
> In reality? No.
>
> It's not the virtualization that breaks, it's all the surrounding
> infrastructure, especially Layer 2. You will not believe how fragile
> that stuff can get.
>
> In the old days, a small slip up could isolate a small part of the
> network. These days, a small slip-up easily ripples though the entire
> network and takes down all of it, and sadly this is not rare. The
> networking needs of VMs are radically different from the traditional,
> and this is the side-effect: fragility.

Sounds like the technology isn't ready to compare favorably with dedicated
yet in an "ordinary" scenario with a website to run.  Maybe in a few years?
 The concept is amazing.  I'd also like to move my desktops and even
laptops to the cloud once things get solidified. Then client hardware
becomes interchangeable, disposable... each physical location would only
need one thin client and a bunch of USB peripherals (DisplayLink, etc).

- Grant

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2206 bytes --]