3 ms·
I mean, you're basically setting up a datacenter if you aren't using Beanstalk. I see complaints all the time about how complicated the networking is, IAM, etc
by swozey 10y ago
I mean, you're basically setting up a datacenter if you aren't using Beanstalk.
I see complaints all the time about how complicated the networking is, IAM, etc is. But it's far more simple dealing with VPCs then having to buy and hop onto a bunch of F5s/Brocades etc that tend to require their own network engineers on staff.
The issue always seems to be that someone tries to move a company onto AWS but they lack the experience in actually running infrastructure to that degree. If you know Change Management you can figure out Cloud Formation templates, if you don't you're likely completely lost and rolling out instances by hand. If you don't know any network engineering you're likely going to have issues with load balancers and VPCs.
You can really see the experience difference in people when you work on multiple AWS infrastructures. And that's the huge benefit to it. You can practically roll out whatever sort of infrastructure your business requires.
If you're experienced enough you can basically do every single thing in AWS/GCP without having to hire ancillary staff (network engs, etc).
I personally use Cloud Formation and create EVERYTHING by it. Load balancers, VPCs, instances, kubernetes, etc. But yeah, if you haven't touched CF before it can be like walking into a spider web of confusion - but believe me, I'd rather do that over again than take over someones hardware that has no APIs, no dashboards, no centralization. I spent years in datacenters where everything was done manually. I wouldn't ever want to go back now that I've learned to treat infrastructure as code.
But hey, if you want to run Vsphere servers, manually configure instances and databases and not do any automation via AWS you can do that as well.
That's why it's incredible.
- tscs37 10y agoI totally agree, AWS is great if you are basically screwing in the racks yourself anyway (metaphorically speaking). But for running a few hobbyist/amateur servers on it, it's absolutely horrifyingly complicated, especially when I'm not really a networking engineer, I like tinkering in the backend but not to that degree.
- swozey 10y agoYou could look into Beanstalk, it depends on what the code your app is written in, though. But yeah, I really wouldn't suggest AWS for something simple that DO or Linode could easily handle. GCP is also far more simplified than AWS if you haven't tried it. The way they do server auth via Google accounts (using gcloud) is pretty awesome and simple. You can make project-level SSH keys that are automatically placed onto every server and you can block specific servers from receiving them all through the UI. I do greatly miss AWS's breadth of service offerings, though.
- joseph 10y agoAWS did just introduce Lightsail, which is for people who just want a VPS. It's funny because I worked for a VPS hosting company back when EC2 first came out. At the time I thought it was the death knell for that type of web hosting, but now ten years later Amazon is going to try and grab that same market.
- user5994461 10y ago> If you're experienced enough you can basically do every single thing in AWS/GCP without having to hire ancillary staff (network engs, etc). Disagree. You definitely need that staff. Just because it's point and click UI (or script and execute terraform) instead of physical cables doesn't mean you don't need highly skilled network guys to design and configure it.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]