4 ms·
In addition to physical security there's hardware longevity as datacenters tend to be both more efficiently cooled and cleaner than the average home, efficient
by bri3d 14y ago
In addition to physical security there's hardware longevity as datacenters tend to be both more efficiently cooled and cleaner than the average home, efficient network interconnect rather than consumer-grade hardware on consumer-oriented last-mile infrastructure, redundant power... the list goes on and on.
It seems like the grandparent poster really should rent part of a co-located rack instead.
I don't think there's much sense in hosting locally in a home environment with Google Fiber for almost any use case regardless of their ToS or the service's quality: for a system serving user requests a home doesn't deliver reliability or redundancy, for a lightly-utilized offline processing system a cloud provider is almost universally cheaper, and for a heavily-utilized offline processing system power and cooling costs become competitive with a datacenter relatively quickly (not to mention the cost of downtime - if you're at high utilization, downtime will cause your job queue to build rapidly and possibly insurmountably when you can't supply burst capacity).
- willholloway 14y ago> It seems like the grandparent poster really should rent part of a co-located rack instead. For my use I need the fastest CPU + ram + IO I can get for as little as possible. The network does not need to be the best because this is not serving user requests. I do not want to take the time to make my code run in parallel. An Intel Core i7 3770k with SSDs is the cheapest scaling I can get. I use the same machine as a workstation for coding. This setup saves me $180 a month at the cheapest dedicated host I could find + I have a blazing fast work station.