4 ms·

I just spent the better part of two years advocating, pushing, and fighting for months to add new bandwidth to our datacenter. Thankfully after they understood

by hobs 4y ago

I just spent the better part of two years advocating, pushing, and fighting for months to add new bandwidth to our datacenter. Thankfully after they understood the problem it only took 8 months of procurement, techs going to the data center 10+ times with endless screw ups, and everyone pointing the finger at each other. While the cloud sucks in many ways the traditional setup has big problems as soon as you hit a midsize company ime.

re-thc 3y ago
Or maybe there's a mid point. It's not datacenter or cloud. There are providers offering physical servers for rent for example. Lots of combinations in-between.
dijit 4y ago
I counter your anecdote with mine! A cloud vendor (who will be nameless as I signed an NDA specifically that prevents me from disparaging them; but one of the big three) ran out of capacity for me and it was 3 months before they managed to fix it. -- that was with a couple million a month in spend. Cloud is still servers; you just depend on someone elses capacity management skills and you hope that there isn't a rush to populate a location (like when a region goes down and everyone's auto-provisioners move regions to yours)
- Jochim 4y ago
  Barring exceptional circumstances, I don't have to fight that fight at the cloud provider though. Their business is more likely to be amenable to maintaining and expanding reasonable levels of capacity. I have to deal with a grumpy finance guy that thinks my whole department is overpaid already, especially so if we might use the dreaded `CapEx` word.
- hobs 4y ago
  3 months vs 2 years, I'll take it :)
  - NohatCoder 4y ago
    I think the main point here is that there is no limit to incompetence. And sure, having your own servers allow for some goofs that won't happen with cloud (the opposite is also true). But your org had the means to fix the issue, and they choose not to. That has fundamentally got nothing to do with technology choice.

by hobs 4y ago

re-thc 3y ago

Or maybe there's a mid point. It's not datacenter or cloud. There are providers offering physical servers for rent for example. Lots of combinations in-between.

dijit 4y ago

I counter your anecdote with mine! A cloud vendor (who will be nameless as I signed an NDA specifically that prevents me from disparaging them; but one of the big three) ran out of capacity for me and it was 3 months before they managed to fix it. -- that was with a couple million a month in spend. Cloud is still servers; you just depend on someone elses capacity management skills and you hope that there isn't a rush to populate a location (like when a region goes down and everyone's auto-provisioners move regions to yours)

Jochim 4y ago
Barring exceptional circumstances, I don't have to fight that fight at the cloud provider though. Their business is more likely to be amenable to maintaining and expanding reasonable levels of capacity. I have to deal with a grumpy finance guy that thinks my whole department is overpaid already, especially so if we might use the dreaded `CapEx` word.
hobs 4y ago
3 months vs 2 years, I'll take it :)
- NohatCoder 4y ago
  I think the main point here is that there is no limit to incompetence. And sure, having your own servers allow for some goofs that won't happen with cloud (the opposite is also true). But your org had the means to fix the issue, and they choose not to. That has fundamentally got nothing to do with technology choice.