21–30 of 149 posts
Can anyone give me the advantages of choosing an EC2 dedicated host over going with a true dedicated server?
All the rest of your infrastructure is in AWS and you want the high interconnect speeds.
(Edit: I may have misunderstood the comment. This will certainly have a faster interconnect to EC2 compared to a non-EC2 dedicated server.)
Can anyone give me the advantages of choosing an EC2 dedicated host over going with a true dedicated server?
Other than licensing, an advantage I'm guessing is in reducing noisy neighbor affects. In our case, we use a lot of t2.micro instances, which seem to suffer from this.
A disadvantage is that the instances within a dedicated host might all go down together? (similar to if you put all your instances in us-east-1e and 1e goes down?, or of course if all of us-east goes down). Although I'm not sure a dedicated host itself is more likely to go down, while a datacenter remains operational. That's what I'm most interested in knowing - how do these fail?
Some pro/cons that would be interesting to discuss: Other than licensing, an advantage I'm guessing is in reducing noisy neighbor affects. In our case, we use a lot of t2.micro instances, which seem to suffer from this. A disadvantage is that the instances within a dedicated host might all go down together? (similar to if you put all your instances in us-east-1e and 1e goes down?, or of course if all of us-east goes…
All the advantages of a dedicated server without the hassle of saving tons of money.
What I understand so far - it is physically bundling a fixed amount of virtual machines to a physical host - in the example "dedicated host" 22 * m4.large.
Bundling your virtual machine to one or a series of physical hosts / on the same network segment is a service you can have from quite a few hosting providers (if you ask).
If you opt for a solution like this, it is also most likely that you will run an enterprise scale solution and you will do so for quite some time - at least 6 months upwards.
Keeping that in mind together with a lifetime of at least 2 years for such HW, you will be paying 8 times the HW cost for a 2y lifetime for a management layer (storage / connectivity you pay per GB with EC2).
I guess everybody will have to see how this fits into their business model for non volatile / predictable resource demand or a set of when physical iron might be a better choice (colo or rent).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the rest of your infrastructure is in AWS and you want the high interconnect speeds.
This shouldn't be any faster than normal EC2. (Edit: I may have misunderstood the comment. This will certainly have a faster interconnect to EC2 compared to a non-EC2 dedicated server.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the rest of your infrastructure is in AWS and you want the high interconnect speeds.
This shouldn't be any faster than normal EC2. (Edit: I may have misunderstood the comment. This will certainly have a faster interconnect to EC2 compared to a non-EC2 dedicated server.)
Some pro/cons that would be interesting to discuss: Other than licensing, an advantage I'm guessing is in reducing noisy neighbor affects. In our case, we use a lot of t2.micro instances, which seem to suffer from this. A disadvantage is that the instances within a dedicated host might all go down together? (similar to if you put all your instances in us-east-1e and 1e goes down?, or of course if all of us-east goes…
All the advantages of a dedicated server without the hassle of saving tons of money.
Their example dedicated host adds up to $2'226 per month - had a quick calc on the retail HW cost for a machine like this - should not be more than $6.5k with 2 * E5-2670 v3 12 cores. What I understand so far - it is physically bundling a fixed amount of virtual machines to a physical host - in the example "dedicated host" 22 * m4.large. Bundling your virtual machine to one or a series of physical hosts / on the same…