4 ms·
I'd like to see a machine with an SSD from Amazon that wasn't so big and expensive.
by jahewson 14y ago
I'd like to see a machine with an SSD from Amazon that wasn't so big and expensive.
- devopstom 14y agoI don't think that's possible. Big|Fast|Cheap, Choose two. (or one, under some circumstances).
- Dylan16807 14y agoI think you misread the parent. jahewson asked for a machine that is Fast and Cheap and Not Big. More specifically they want to upgrade a weaker machine with an SSD instead of getting a high end machine with an SSD.
- signifiers 14y agoNothing has been announced, but fwiw, I've been running benchmarks comparing the SSD block storage at Rackspace (http://www.rackspace.com/cloud/blockstorage/pricing/ http://www.rackspace.com/cloud/blockstorage/pricing/), as well as the all-SSD VMs from Digital Ocean (http://www.digitalocean.com/ http://www.digitalocean.com/), and frankly, the CPU & I/O blow away EC2 so far. Compared to Google Compute Engine (https://cloud.google.com/pricing/compute-engine https://cloud.google.com/pricing/compute-engine), CPU is on par, but obviously SSD is going to best even zippy local instance spindle storage. For example, calculating 8th order Fermat prime factors (single thread/core intensive, so ymmv), EC2 XLs are getting smoked by 20-50% vs. Digital Ocean's 2 core 2GB RAM/40GB SSD. Replicated in multiple data centers/zones a dozen times. Not bad for $20/month! Also, for the low end, remember "core" on EC2 is throttled at 50%-75% for the small & medium instances, translating to lots of stolen cpu time. Still working out the details on the Rackspace SSD EBS-equivalents, but will post update soon. But, agreed, given across-the-board I/O benefits of SSD, surprised Amazon isn't offering something in the non-cluster category. And at $2,500+ /mo, the new instances are definitely targeting a very niche use case for burst-heavy batching.