3 ms·

I feel like you have a unique perspective to offer here - though at the moment I disagree given the lack of detail. What about the specialized services from AW

I feel like you have a unique perspective to offer here - though at the moment I disagree given the lack of detail. What about the specialized services from AWS provides leverage outside of the “cattle mindset”? In my experience, AWS’s primary value and leverage is based on intermittent burst compute. It’s why you rarely get a hard answer on the Hz of each vCPU and have credits to the overuse or underuse of said instances. The cpu is then used to arbitrage value in the dedicated services like lambda and others - so your mindset and infra needs to match AWS’s incentives to get the same value, correct?

Symbiote 4y ago
The main disadvantage of the colo servers I administrate is the lack of flexibility for periods of hours to days. We use ~50 fairly high performance (RAM, CPU, disc) servers pretty much continuously, so the savings compared to AWS etc are considerable. Every couple of years there's a software upgrade required, and it would be convenient to have another 50 servers to use during the transition, just for a few days. Compared to AWS prices, we can easily justify keeping some old servers around to help with this sort of thing. A managed server company (Hetzner etc) would be somewhere in-between; presumably able to rent us 50 extra machines for the duration, but (last time we checked) still more expensive than managing the servers ourselves.
Szpadel 4y ago
> The cpu is then used to arbitrage value in the dedicated services like lambda and others This could be only the case is t* instances? I learned the hard way that CPU misses can add even 30% of request latency, especially when you often do I/O eg to external services like db/Redis/etc I didn't notice such behaviors on AWS. but when thinking about it, I read somewhere that one reason they have dedicated CPUs is for partitioning CPU cache so it's not shared between VMs. so maybe with some tricks they could get some free compute without side effects?

Symbiote 4y ago

The main disadvantage of the colo servers I administrate is the lack of flexibility for periods of hours to days. We use ~50 fairly high performance (RAM, CPU, disc) servers pretty much continuously, so the savings compared to AWS etc are considerable. Every couple of years there's a software upgrade required, and it would be convenient to have another 50 servers to use during the transition, just for a few days. Compared to AWS prices, we can easily justify keeping some old servers around to help with this sort of thing. A managed server company (Hetzner etc) would be somewhere in-between; presumably able to rent us 50 extra machines for the duration, but (last time we checked) still more expensive than managing the servers ourselves.

Szpadel 4y ago

> The cpu is then used to arbitrage value in the dedicated services like lambda and others This could be only the case is t* instances? I learned the hard way that CPU misses can add even 30% of request latency, especially when you often do I/O eg to external services like db/Redis/etc I didn't notice such behaviors on AWS. but when thinking about it, I read somewhere that one reason they have dedicated CPUs is for partitioning CPU cache so it's not shared between VMs. so maybe with some tricks they could get some free compute without side effects?