7 ms·
Amazon ElastiCache - Now With a Dash of Redis
- ajtaylor 13y agoIt was only a matter of time before they added Redis to the mix. Glad to see it happening sooner rather than later though.
- werkshy 13y agoWe just spent days moving stuff away from Elasticache due to memcached limitations, and would love to have moved to managed Redis. We're an AWS partner, with the highest level support contract and if we'd known two weeks ago that this was in the pipeline, we would have waited. AWS, why don't you give us any road map for stuff like this?
- tyw 13y agoyeah we recently migrated from memcached on elasticache to redis on EC2 (and bought the reservations), though our migration rolled out about 4-6 weeks ago. oh well, I guess.
- jessaustin 13y agoI get the impression that Amazon are deathly afraid of causing an Osborne effect.
- jamornh 13y agoAccording to this it should be quite easy to move your current redis on EC2 back to ElastiCache: "Seamless Integration: If you are running Redis on EC2, you can transfer its contents to a new Amazon ElastiCache for Redis node. You may also attach a Redis node running on EC2 to an Amazon ElastiCache for Redis node."[1] ... at least after your reservations run out. [1] https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2013/09/04/amazon-elasticache-for-redis/ https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2013/09/04/amazon...
- spartango 13y agoIf you reach out to AWS people, you may get some of this information before it goes public. AWS likes to do private (NDA'd) beta tests of new products with AWS-heavy customers. They work off of the feedback while bigger customers get their needs satisfied.
- willejs 13y agowe asked and they hinted a few months ago.
- derefr 13y agoSo, how does ElastiCache fare compared to all the hosted Redis-as-a-service (or Redis-as-a-PaaS-addon) products?
- whalesalad 13y agoWell unless you roll with a Micro instance (213mb of RAM and dismal performance), the price for a Small on-demand instance (1.3GB memory) is ~$54 per month. You save quite a bit by going with a reserved instance, where you pay about $70 up-front but then your monthly instance price is almost halved, coming in at around $32 per/mo. Either way, it's going to be more cost-effective at a lower level to go with something like Redis-to-go, Openredis, etc... if you need something simple. Long story short, if you're on Heroku and (like me) were thinking/hoping that this might be a nice alternative to the various add-ons available ... I don't think that the juice is worth the squeeze. One, you have to administer and maintain things yourself (which is trivial for something like this, so not a big deal) but the pricing doesn't line up. The Redis providers leading the market today are able to do so because they provision the heavy-hitter EC2 nodes and then chop them up. It's important to note though you can get a free micro instance for a year on the free usage tier. Micro's are like the section-8 housing of the server world, but free is free and beggars can't be choosers ;)
- progx 13y agoThe prices of many Redis-Service-Provider will drop rapidly after amazons release ?
- svmegatron 13y agoOr they will all start making more money.
- andrewguenther 13y agoI will never ever use Redis-to-go again. Our instance was down for almost a week before we even heard a peep from customer service.
- 13y ago
- AznHisoka 13y agoOf all the things that you can put to the cloud, I'm not sure why people would want a cloud-hosted memory store. It's easy as heck to set it up in your own server, probably costs less to maintain and host, and faster too as it's closer to your data centers.
- purephase 13y agoIf you're using other AWS services, then this makes a lot of sense. It saves you the hassle of setting multiple redis nodes on EC2 and the (admittedly low) maintenance. I think it's a good move on their part.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- apetresc 13y agoI can't tell if you're joking - it's meant precisely for people whose "data center" IS AWS, for exactly the reason you gave.
- pashields 13y agoThey handle automatic failover, which redis does not currently do out of the box. That part is pretty cool. Maybe not worth the price, but definitely useful.
- yesbabyyes 13y agoActually, Redis has a pretty clever failover solution now, in redis-sentinel: http://redis.io/topics/sentinel http://redis.io/topics/sentinel
- aioprisan 13y agoredis sentinel is out in the latest stable release and was out in the dev branch for the past year
- skyebook 13y agoGood on them for doing this, its missing one substantial configuration option though: Redis Authentication. Security groups are great, but it would be comforting to have some challenge when hitting cache.
- seanmccann 13y agoExactly. This is especially important when using it in conjunction with Heroku.
- zwily 13y agoLooks to me like this doesn't support more than one redis instance in a cluster (to make a ring) - just replication groups. I'm guessing that's a "TBD" thing. :(
- level09 13y agoBased on a personal experience, I found that setting up a dedicated machine is way cheaper than using those services. I ended up replacing the following: - Mongodb on a EC2 instance instead of Dynamodb - EC2 Mysql instance instead of RDS - Redis instance instead of Elastic Cache - Solr on EC2 instead of Cloud Search - FFmpeg instance instead of Elastic transcoder
- willejs 13y agoAt scale this is probably cheaper, if your a startup trying to scale, probably not.
- progx 13y agoIt depend on the service. Usually scale is not a problem, but scale in a short time (hours) can be a huge problem. But most companies would love to have this problem ;-)
- axelf 13y agowhy even use EC2 then? It would be much cheaper to use any other hosting provider.
- j_baker 13y agoTwo things: 1. What kind of EC2 instance are we talking about for MongoDB? If you're not using an SSD, comparing Dynamo and Mongo wouldn't be an apples-to-apples comparison. 2. I buy that the strictly technical costs of these systems is lower, but I'm not certain I buy that the overall cost (including engineer time to set these services up and monitor them) is lower.
- level09 13y ago1. With a provisioned iops the performance is almost identical to SSD, but yes probably I haven't done a side-to-side technical comparison. I only wanted to point out that I replaced one with the other and I had a good cut in cost. 2. Maybe it is just me, but I really think that some services like mongodb/redis does not require a big amount of system administration work to setup, I have actually wrote many python scripts to automate most of these tasks. but again maybe this depends on the country and the IT culture.
- andresdouglas 13y agoSo basically we can now replace the painful SQS with hosted Redis! Yayy! RE: Mongo. If you're using EC2 for MongoDB you're most likely doing it wrong. Not sure if there is much written about the Foursquare problem out there, maybe I'll get around to writing about it, one day. Pretty much the only company that I know off doing bullet-proof, scalable and fast Mongo hosting is http://objectrocket.com/ http://objectrocket.com/. There's a reason Rackspace acquired them. Unless you're able to get placement of your SSD loaded servers in the same datacenters as Amazon, go with them. It's well worth your time to not muck around with Mongo.
- apu 13y agoWow, this is yet another major step forward for redis adoption! Congrats to antirez and the whole redis team!