3 ms·
Sure and GitHub also has literally an order of magnitude more infrastructure than is being discussed in these proposals and retains Amazon Web Services and Dire
by nixgeek 10y ago
Sure and GitHub also has literally an order of magnitude more infrastructure than is being discussed in these proposals and retains Amazon Web Services and Direct Connect for a bunch of really good reasons.
Transparency from GitLab is excellent but you shouldn't really generalise statements about cloud suitability without the full picture or "Walking a mile in their shoes".
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- sytse 10y agoYep, and we at GitLab have Direct Connect to AWS as a requirement for picking out new colo.
- Pyxl101 10y agoIf you guys use AWS, have you taken a look at EBS provisioned IOPS? EBS provisioned IOPS comes to mind here since it allows you to specify the desired IOPS of a volume, and provides an SLA. > Providers don't provide a minimum IOPS, so they can just drop you. The reason I ask is because the blog post generalizes a lot about what cloud providers offer or what the cloud is capable of, but doesn't explore some of the options available to address those concerns, like provisioned IOPS with EBS, dedicated instances with EC2, provisioned throughput with DynamoDB, and so on.
- sytse 10y agoEBS goes up to 16TB, we need an order of magnitude more. You're right that the blog post was generalizing. BTW We looked into AWS but didn't want to use an AWS only solution because of maximum size, costs, and the reusability of the solution.
- hagbarddenstore 10y agoPer disk. You can attach multiple disks to a single EC2 node. So, RAID multiple EBS volumes and you have a larger disk.