Netflix to Shut Down Last Datacenter

Post by anotherangrydev » Fri, Aug 14, 2015, 2:59 PM UTC

p1esk wrote: post #43

anotherangrydev wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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!"

Sorry, I don't get it - why would you consider using cloud servers if you don't have significant spikes in your traffic? Regarding hardware failures - it's not that hard to arrange proper redundancies in your systems, and it will certainly be cheaper than outsourcing it to Amazon. Cloud only becomes cost effective when your spikes are several times larger than your normal traffic, and you must maintain good QoS at al…

Post by illumen » Fri, Aug 14, 2015, 6:45 PM UTC

pfg wrote: post #58

adventured wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because sometimes cloud servers are very cost effective, easy, and fast to deploy: Digital Ocean for example. $40 / month for 4gb of ram, 4tb of transfer, and two cores, is very cost effective. Linode is also very reasonable. If all I need is that scale of computing, what should I use instead that makes sense other than cloud services? Setting up colo or a dedicated box for that would be more expensive and a much lar…

Arguably, Digital Ocean is more like a regular hosting provider with better onboarding. Plenty of hosters offer comparable infrastructure for the same price (you can even get something dedicated). They're also far cheaper than AWS, where you pay a premium for the elasticity and access to the ecosystem. If there's anything to compare AWS with, it would be Google Cloud Platform, Azure and maybe Rackspace.

Post by bestnameever » Sat, Aug 15, 2015, 6:29 PM UTC

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?