Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

blogs.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 85 posts

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#31

Post by oldgregg »

probdist wrote: post #14

Netflix is still running its own CDNs / using CDNs outside of Amazon. "The company, which competes with Amazon in the video-streaming business, elected to keep control of its own content delivery network." So Netflix is still probably doing the bulk of their traffic themselves. Application servers with AWS is probably not a huge bill versus massive video traffic.

Fascinating. I bet they are running their own CDN to prevent Amazon from having full access to their traffic volume/streaming demand. Would be huge competitive advantage for amazon streaming if they could see per-title demand.

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#32

Post by m_mueller »

hasenj wrote: post #28
m_mueller wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me it didn't even load the ad, I just saw the "log in" at the bottom and a blank page. "who needs an article when you can have a headline?"

Same for me. It must be the ad-blocker (uBlock)

I'm on FF without adblock extension, so at least for me it wasn't. I'm in Japan however, so I'm probably completely irrelevant to the operators of that webzone. "What are you telling me, Johnny? There's people outside the US who have access to the intertubes? Getoutofhere!"

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#33

Post by function_seven »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #7
function_seven wrote: post #4

> But many companies still run sensitive software in their data centers or in private clouds , in which a company has dedicated cloud resources from a third-party or within its own premises . (Emphasis mine) Ok, honest question: If I have a "private cloud" on my own premises, how is that not a data center?

> If I have a "private cloud" on my own premises, how is that not a data center? It is, but "private cloud" on top of that implies a lot more about how you run that datacenter: using virtual machines, abstracting hardware, using APIs to manage servers and storage (ideally the same APIs that would let you just as easily run on someone else's cloud infrastructure), and otherwise trying to minimize your reliance on any…

Thanks. I was looking at it from the power, cooling, and square-footage perspective—didn't even consider the sysadmin portion—but I see the massive savings that could be had by uncoupling metal pizza boxes and one-off hardware requirements from the applications that run on them

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#34

Post by nickff »

fiberoptick wrote: post #30

I've never understood why so many companies are comfortable giving Amazon such leverage over their business infrastructure. Could someone explain why this is a good move in spite of the risk that Amazon could jack their prices up in the future?

The free market is the basic guarantee Netflix is counting on.[1] If Amazon 'jacks up it's prices', Netflix will simply move to another provider. Amazon is also unlikely to make sudden moves which disadvantage its customers, as any such moves will come at a tremendous cost of reputation, and many customers will leave and never come back (; as Amazon has no power to compel customers to purchase their services). In a market, no one has leverage, everyone simply has a position and an offer.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_market

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#35

Post by function_seven »

fiberoptick wrote: post #30

I've never understood why so many companies are comfortable giving Amazon such leverage over their business infrastructure. Could someone explain why this is a good move in spite of the risk that Amazon could jack their prices up in the future?

Total guess on my part, but I'd imagine Netflix has locked-in long-term pricing. Of course, there's the opposite danger of the rest of the world getting cheaper...

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#36

Post by p1esk »

anotherangrydev wrote: post #10

Do you think they have a special deal w/ Amazon? Otherwise I imagine that's a really expensive bill. Do you think they're doing it because its cheaper when you account for things at a larger scale? Like, reduced liabilities, payrolls, CapEx, whatever? Or is it more expensive but still "easier" and they go with it? I really REALLY would like to hear everything from everyone about this, because right now I'm facing tha…

The question is, do you need as much elasticity as Netflix does?

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#37

Post by wmf »

whoopdedo wrote: post #29
probdist wrote: post #14

Netflix is still running its own CDNs / using CDNs outside of Amazon. "The company, which competes with Amazon in the video-streaming business, elected to keep control of its own content delivery network." So Netflix is still probably doing the bulk of their traffic themselves. Application servers with AWS is probably not a huge bill versus massive video traffic.

I was wondering about that. Open Connect was significant in the disagreement between Netflix and Comcast that spurred the net neutrality debate. Unless I'm mistaken Netflix ended up agreeing to the peering fees, though after negotiating down a bit. So does using AWS for mundane traffic actually save them money by avoiding the CDN bandwidth that Netflix has to pay ISPs to use?

AFAIK Amazon charges more for bandwidth than the greediest ISP, but I admit I haven't looked at the EB/month transfer tier.

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#38

Post by wmf »

oldgregg wrote: post #31
probdist wrote: post #14

Netflix is still running its own CDNs / using CDNs outside of Amazon. "The company, which competes with Amazon in the video-streaming business, elected to keep control of its own content delivery network." So Netflix is still probably doing the bulk of their traffic themselves. Application servers with AWS is probably not a huge bill versus massive video traffic.

Fascinating. I bet they are running their own CDN to prevent Amazon from having full access to their traffic volume/streaming demand. Would be huge competitive advantage for amazon streaming if they could see per-title demand.

Or because it's cheaper.

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#39

Post by anotherangrydev »

p1esk wrote: post #36
anotherangrydev wrote: post #10

Do you think they have a special deal w/ Amazon? Otherwise I imagine that's a really expensive bill. Do you think they're doing it because its cheaper when you account for things at a larger scale? Like, reduced liabilities, payrolls, CapEx, whatever? Or is it more expensive but still "easier" and they go with it? I really REALLY would like to hear everything from everyone about this, because right now I'm facing tha…

The question is, do you need as much elasticity as Netflix does?

Not like in "I had a surge in traffic of millions of visitors"

But yes like in "Some hardware failed, but yeah that's not my problem anymore!"

Re: Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

#40

Post by Ologn »

fiberoptick wrote: post #30

I've never understood why so many companies are comfortable giving Amazon such leverage over their business infrastructure. Could someone explain why this is a good move in spite of the risk that Amazon could jack their prices up in the future?

> I've never understood why so many companies are comfortable giving Amazon such leverage over their business infrastructure.

You have to be a pretty big company in order to not let another company have leverage over your infrastructure. Hosting your networked servers in your own office? You're depending on Verizon, AT&T or Qwest, even if those are not the companies selling you your pipes.

Co-locating your servers, getting feeds from 2-3 carriers, while doing BGP with your high-end Cisco routers? You're depending on the hosting facility, such as Telehouse.

So you want to survive a blackout in one section of the US. Now you need at least two server facilities. Your remote facility needs at least one full-time tech.

Corporate infrastructure can get in the way as well. Your division of the conglomerate is in San Francisco, but another division is in New York. Perfect, your division's remote IT person can work out of that division's New York office. But the conglomerate might be structured so that is not really possible. The other division may as well be another company.

So a small company can't afford to do this. A big company can get so big that it's not feasible either. If the big company has one central IT department that all divisions use, it becomes more feasible, but how many big companies only have one centralized IT department? Even if such a creature exists - the big company buys a small company, or merges with another big company - boom, two IT departments again.

Post reply on HN