3 ms·
What the crap? Look what you are saying is crazy. 1) you aren't including operations staff. 2) what are you doing for DR/HA? 3) how about CDN etc? 4) how ab
by anko 12y ago
What the crap? Look what you are saying is crazy.
1) you aren't including operations staff.
2) what are you doing for DR/HA?
3) how about CDN etc?
4) how about load balancing between datacenters? DNS failover?
5) how many units of computer would $200k be at amazon? I'd imagine a lot. I recently (nearly a year ago) specced out 16 servers on AWS with HA/DR on opsworks for $15k over 3 years ($5k/year). Back of the envelope calculations make that 640 cores for your $200k. With 400GB transfer a month.
6) what are you doing for backups?
7) what if you don't need to utilize a whole rack? Most of the time systems don't fully utilize racks. But you're paying for them anyway.
- liveoneggs 12y agoI think you should keep using the cloud but I'll respond to your points anyway. 1- you still need staff to deal with aws. I would argue that you need more. 2- HA is the same; DR is different. Use AWS for your DR ;) 3- What about them? there is literally no difference 4- see 3 5- a lot, I'm sure. Enough to justify owned physical equipment that you aren't sharing and doesn't get "retired" every other week 6- whatever I want, including putting them on glacier or sending them to my data center's cheap tape storage 7- it's a trivial part of the cost, why worry about it? or rent half a rack if you don't mind taking on a little extra cord-pulling risk