7 ms·
That's completely ridiculous, get some fucking RAID Amazon. I order drives off newegg directly to my DC and I'm yet to lose data with the cheapest drives avail
by problems 10y ago
That's completely ridiculous, get some fucking RAID Amazon.
I order drives off newegg directly to my DC and I'm yet to lose data with the cheapest drives available in RAID10.
- prdonahue 10y agoYes, solving problems at your scale and AWS' are quite comparable.
- problems 10y agoNot saying my scale is the the same at all - but the fact they can't do something so simple that I can do it as a single individual is embarrassing at best. Simple solutions to this do scale - Linode and DigitalOcean don't have such issues for example - and while they're not Amazon scale, they are quite large and I'd say they prove the concept.
- phonon 10y agoEBS data is backed up in multiple redundant ways (using erasure encoding I think). Local storage is not intended for permanent storage, and is more use at your own risk. That's also why most of the new EC2 instances don't even support local storage. Availability =/= durability of course
- problems 10y agoEBS is incredibly expensive and slow, not really a good solution. It'd be nice if they offered a better local storage option.
- foxylion 10y agoI think most people rely on EBS and are happy with it. Sure it depends on the use case, but I think it works for most use cases.
- phonon 10y agoIncredibly expensive and slow compared to what? A 500 GB SSD (gp2) costs $50/m, and has 1500 - 3000 IOPS. It's okay for most loads. For higher performance, you can use 1. EBS Provisioned IOPS (kind of expensive) 2. Aurora (for DB use) 3. The new I3 instances (super fast local storage at a reasonable price.)
- tomc1985 10y agoThat's the cost of a new 500GB SSD per month! For the cost of three months' EBS storage and a couple of hours you could setup your own RAID array with a spare for backups and possibly get better uptimes than Amazon :P
- problems 10y agoNot to mention you'll get 3-5x better IOPS off a dedicated SSD. I guess this just boils down again to Amazon not being cost effective enough for my use case in yet another way.
- phonon 10y agoActually, you can get way more than 3-5x better IOPS on your own SSD! Different types of storage have different types of trade-offs. EBS is great for some things, slow and overpriced for others...
- phonon 10y agoHuh? What kind of 500 GB SSD costs $50? And again--500 GB on EBS is not stored on 500 GB of flash...they use erasure coding and distribute it over ~3x as much, roughly. Oh, and good luck creating snapshots of your home RAID!
- problems 10y ago> Huh? What kind of 500 GB SSD costs $50? Definitely not $50 to my knowledge but for ~$170 you can get a Samsung 850 EVO which is rated for 98k IOPS. They're fairly reliable drives and much, much faster than anything you'll get on EBS. You could be running that full 3x replication in less than a year of paying for EBS. > Oh, and good luck creating snapshots of your home RAID! LVM, ZFS and Btrfs all do snapshotting quite nicely. FreeNAS - commonly used for consumer grade NASes will automatically manage ZFS snapshots for you too. Amazon will sell you extra space to store snapshots, sure, but increasing the size of your devices usually solves that problem. And quite cost effectively as you can probably tell by now...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- LoSboccacc 10y agobut I never lost data off an usb stick how hard could it be!
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- aurelianito 10y agoReally?!?! Several times USB sticks (and USB HDs) failed on me and other people I work with.
- vacri 10y agoYes, the only way a server can die is from non-raided disks.
- foxylion 10y agoIt's not just a RAID that can fail. And everyone who uses AWS should expect failures. You should build your infrastructure to handle such failures well.
- problems 10y agoThey offer no RAID on local storage and only the expensive, IO restricted EBS as an alternative.