5 ms·
He did, Quote : We are going to say we used four hours of labor. This includes drive time to the primary data center. Since it is far away (18-20 minute drive
by z92 6y ago
He did,
Quote :
We are going to say we used four hours of labor. This includes drive time to the primary data center. Since it is far away (18-20 minute drive), we actually did not go there for several quarters. So over 32 months, we had budgeted $640 for remote hands. We effectively either paid $160/ hr or paid less than that even rounding up to four hours.
- Rantenki 6y agoRead those figures again. They're such an underestimate as to be laughable, and apply only to the physical racking efforts. There is no way in the world that the only effort taken related to infrastructure is entirely encapsulated in ~ $200 per year.
- Patrick-STH 6y ago100%. We had 11 months where nobody touched the racks as an example and the visit 11 months later was the one to physically get a tool I had left there. I mentioned I even track drive time.
- joshuamorton 6y agoHow much time did you spend deciding which components to upgrade and purchasing parts to later install? How much would you charge a client for that time?
- Patrick-STH 6y agoVery little, but that is probably because we cover the server industry in-depth with reviews and such. I mentioned a bit that that knowledge is key. This is our cost analysis and not going to be the same for everyone.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 6y agoFor a business with growing needs (most people at the point of making the decision), won't they need to go to install more hardware frequently, if nothing else?
- Patrick-STH 6y agoThat may be true. We grow 20-30% Y/Y which is not as big as many other places (but is more than most others in our space.) 20-30% growth we handle with refresh cycles since we have extra capacity.
- legulere 6y agoStackoverflow was run on a few servers (don’t know about how many there are now) http://highscalability.com/blog/2014/7/21/stackoverflow-update-560m-pageviews-a-month-25-servers-and-i.html http://highscalability.com/blog/2014/7/21/stackoverflow-upda... Often you don’t need that much hardware.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- therealx 6y agoA lot of businesses aren't growing at breakneck speeds, and with modern cpu/ram setups, are often massively underprovisioned. A very big car rental company you'd know the name of was being run on four servers, and they were only upgraded at EOL (if something broke, Dell had same day or next day service)
- vonmoltke 6y ago> They're such an underestimate as to be laughable If I am reading the post correctly, those are actuals, not estimates.
- Rantenki 6y agoThey are perfect world actual hours that don't include any unexpected downtime, or any ancillary costs outside of racking.
- vonmoltke 6y ago> They are perfect world actual hours that don't include any unexpected downtime It isn't clear from this particular post, but considering Patrick refers to "overprovisioning" and having a "hot spare" I get the impression that they have designed their DC setup to minimize unexpected downtime. Sure, it can still happen, but with proper up-front planning what you call "perfect world" can become typical. > or any ancillary costs outside of racking As I see it from Patrick's post and my own colo experience, there are three groups of costs for colo that are baked in to the cost of AWS compute and storage: capital cost of hardware (Patrick has a specific line item for this); facility cost; and labor for maintaining the hardware (which is the cost under discussion. What do you think is significant, missing, and unique to colo?