Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

news.ycombinator.com

351–360 of 782 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#351
I agree with you OP.

Our company provides on-premise ERP systems to small (we’re talking at most 20 person companies) wholesale distributors.

Pre-COVID, I was pushing for a cloud solution to our product and pivoting our company towards that model. We’re at a hybrid approach when COVID hit.

What ends up happening with an on-premise/hybrid cloud model is we end up doing a lot of the sysadmin/IT support work for our customers just to get our ERP working. This includes getting ahold of static IP addresses (and absolving responsibility), configuring servers/OSes, and several other things along the same vein that’s wholly irrelevant to the actual ERP like inventory management and accounting.

Long story short, these customers of ours end up expecting us to maintain their on-premise server without actually paying for help or being knowledgable about how it all works. We keep pitching them the cloud but they’re not willing to pay us a recurring fee even though it actually saves the headaches of answering the question “who’s responsibility is it to make sure this server keeps running?"

I think a lot of these answers here are dealing with large-scale products and services where the amount of data and capital costs is so massive it makes sense to start hiring your own admins solely to maintain servers. For these small mom-and-pop shops who are looking for automation, the cloud is still the way to go.

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#352

Like many others have pointed out: Cost. I'm the CTO of a moderately sized gaming community, Hypixel Minecraft, who operates about 700 rented dedicated machines to service 70k-100k concurrent players. We push about 4PB/mo in egress bandwidth, something along the lines of 32gbps 95th-percentile. The big cloud providers have repeatedly quoted us an order of magnitude more than our entire fleet's cost....JUST in bandwid…

Same here - CTO of medium sized company. Our IT infra costs are 1/10th the cost of cloud, simply because I happen to be comfortable having on-premise machine and working on them (sometime myself). We have two dozen servers in two locations. It's more time to setup, but maintenance is actually quite low.

24 servers, interesting. That seems like a small enough setup that I would definitely have left it in the cloud. Much more than that and i think it makes sense to start moving to physical servers. But 24 I would have guessed would be cheaper to maintain in EC2.

Are you setup with one or two racks in each location and maybe one full time IT/Sys admin at each location?

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#353
Becuse we don't trust a foreign cloud provider with our client's data. Why is that so hard to understand?

All the best cloud providers are from the US and as a european company with clients in european government and healthcare we are often not morally or legally allowed to use a foreign provider.

The sad thing is that this is an ongoing battle between people on a municipal level who believe they can save money in clouds, and morally wiser people who are constantly having to put the brakes on those migration projects.

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In germany it's a pretty common think for universities to have some servers for themself. 1. Their use case is kinda different. The servers mostly run heavy CS research related stuff. E.g. they might have heavy CPU load and heavy traffic between they servers but they have less often heavy traffic to the "normal internet" (if they have heavy traffic to the outside it's normally to other research institutes which not s…

AWS has systems with up to 24TiB of RAM (u-24tb1.metal) [0], but the pricing is "call us". For almost 4TiB of RAM (x1e.32xlarge), it's about $28/hr [1] [0] https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2019/10/now-avail... [1] https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/

For a researcher, that means running an experiment changes from "running the experiment" to six months of meetings with higher management establishing business cases, budget justifications, getting competitive quotes from different providers, etc. (in other words it just doesn't happen).

The choice is not between "on premises" and "cloud", it's between "on premises" and "our glossy faculty brochure says you can do this but really you can't".

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here - CTO of medium sized company. Our IT infra costs are 1/10th the cost of cloud, simply because I happen to be comfortable having on-premise machine and working on them (sometime myself). We have two dozen servers in two locations. It's more time to setup, but maintenance is actually quite low.

> maintenance is actually quite low. I do hope you regularly patch and reboot your systems.

I hope so too, but it's not like a fleet of fine-tuned EC2 instances running CentOS 6.5 is going to be patched and rebooted regularly without a similar amount of sysadmin attention.

(Not picking on CentOS, just using it as a placeholder for $REQUIRED_OS_BECAUSE_OF_CUSTOM_SOFTWARE.)

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#357

The (startup) Oxide podcast has good history/stories about on-prem servers, from veterans of pioneering companies. They are fans of open-source firmware and Rust, and are working to make OCP-based servers usable for on-prem. In one podcast, they observed that cloud is initially cheaper, but can quickly become expensive with growth. There is a time window where you can still switch from cloud to on-prem, but if that w…

Their co founder Bryan Cantrill gave a talk at Stanford on what they are trying to do, essentially offer on prem servers comparable to what “hyperscalers” like Google and Facebook put in their data centers — highly efficient and customizable (in low level software) iirc.

https://youtu.be/vvZA9n3e5pc

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#358
post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes, you’re paying for a ton of stuff there that you probably don’t use This is the antithesis of any cloud. You only pay for what you use. > At $5B it would not cost anywhere near that much to replicate. If you can recreate GCP for $5B in capex, there are likely some VCs lurking here who would like a word with you.

Sorry but that’s not correct. Have you ever looked at the economics of cloud compute at that scale? You absolutely are paying for a lot of tooling that’s irrelevant to your use case. This is because GCP has to be a general provider. They have to offer the broadest possible solution to capture as much share as possible. This means there are money losing services (also low margin) that are offered to provide a complete…

Like cable TV.

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#359
post #34

I use a $5/mo DigitalOcean VPS droplet instead of AWS or other "cloud" service. I only have to host an analytics dashboard ( https://usertrack.net/ ), I don't need scaling and this way I know exactly how much I will pay. The resources are more than enough for my needs and I don't think it could be much cheaper even on the most optimized pay-per-minute of use cloud platforms. I also have some other APIs hosted in the…

I like DigitalOcean... but they are a cloud service too.

Most people I talk to or see online discussing their Digital Ocean usage just use their VPS.

Yes they offer managed databases and kubernetes, but these are newer offerings. I of course don't know how well used they are, but I never see or hear anybody talking about them.

I use them for all my stuff when I'm not on company time, and the reason is because I can just be like "spin me up a Debian box," which I cannot easily do on the things folks typically describe as cloud providers.

Re: Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why?

#360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A 2u asus with 2 xeon silver, 64gb ram and 4 x 2080ti is maybe us$15k? We'll use it for as long as its producing useful output. Lets say 5 years? Probably a little longer? A 60bay 4u western digital with 14tb drives is under us$50k? definitely got a dell md1280+1u server with 70x10tb 2yrs ago for under us$50k. Fully populated the following year.. A 2u dell with maybe 20 cores n 128gb ram each should cost less than us…

So service contracts on any of those?

What service contracts? Only hardware warranties n extended hardware warranties..
Post reply on HN