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

Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

techcrunchit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 33 posts

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#21

Post by joevandyk »

psadauskas wrote: post #13
joevandyk wrote: post #4

Anyone use Cloudkick here? On EC2? Recommended?

Maybe I'm too opinionated about the whole thing, but I have yet to find a cloud management solution that does things the way I want. Cloudkick, Rightscale, Chef, all seem to work ok, if you're willing to buy in to their preferred way of doing things. If you want to stray from that, though, its a lot of work, and brittle. I don't know that they're wrong, and I'm right, exactly, but it feels like they're all trying to…

Chef always seemed pretty flexible to me.

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#22

Post by BCGC »

bobfunk wrote: post #14
thaumaturgy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We use Nagios on one of our Linodes to do our server monitoring. It's set up to do nearly constant monitoring; the last time we had a glitch, I received a text message about high CPU load before the graph at Linode had even updated to show the spike. That costs us $20/month, except we're doing it on a server that was already required for another service and had plenty of disk and CPU to spare, so ... really it costs…

We use Nagios combined with Ganglia for webpop.com as well and it's a great solution. But if we weren't on a tight budget (we're bootstrapped) I would have gone with something like CloudKick no doubt. The server for Nagios might be cheap, but installing, refining and updating our monitors does take time that could be used on developing our product instead.

I think it depends on how many servers you monitor :)

$99 per month for 6 servers is really cool.

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#23

Post by BCGC »

jbarham wrote: post #10
chrismiller wrote: post #7

I'm currently using Cloudkick's 1 server developer plan. I would really love to use them to monitor all of our servers but their current plans don't work for us. We use lots of tiny instances and virtual machines. This means for us the cost of Cloudkick for each VM would be around the actual monthly cost of that VM. If you have are in a different position to myself and are using larger instances then I would recommen…

Yeah, it looks a bit pricey considering the cheapest paid plan is $99/month for 6 servers.

I disagree.

What would you use instead?

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#24

Post by revorad »

ddispaltro wrote: post #16
rmoriz wrote: post #15

do they support hetzner.de?

Not at the moment, but you can always add machines from providers we don't support with https://support.cloudkick.com/Setting_up_Cloudkick_with_Phys...

I did this on a small VPS server recently; worked like a charm.

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#25

Post by floodfx »

Great PR but probably misleading. For instance, we signed up initially and didn't find it too useful (although they've added a lot of features since then). We didn't delete our account until just now and when we logged in (again just now) we had 6k notifications from instance startup/shutdown. Never once did we "manage" any of these instances on cloudkick.

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#26

Post by foobarbazetc »

Cloudkick looks nice and I have great respect for the tech team behind it, but it's seriously overpriced.

I don't mind paying for Saas (and pay many thousands a month for all sorts of services), but this is ridiculous:

https://www.cloudkick.com/pricing/

I love how the page suggests that the $949/month plan is somehow the 'default'. :)

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#27

Post by vyrotek »

ddispaltro wrote: post #12
vyrotek wrote: post #8

Where's the Windows Azure support?

Do they have an IaaS solution yet?

I sure hope so because my company uses it :)

I'm sure you were trying to point out that perhaps Azure doesn't meet your criteria for IaaS (yet). But, I think CloudKick offers many services that are possible to work with Azure right now.

Full VM access is just around the corner and people will be shopping for CloudKick types services very soon. My company is ready to be your first Azure customer.

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#28

Post by shykes »

floodfx wrote: post #25

Great PR but probably misleading. For instance, we signed up initially and didn't find it too useful (although they've added a lot of features since then). We didn't delete our account until just now and when we logged in (again just now) we had 6k notifications from instance startup/shutdown. Never once did we "manage" any of these instances on cloudkick.

To be fair, Rightscale uses the same trick on their homepage.

Re: Cloudkick (YC W09) hits 1,000,000 servers

#29

Post by ddispaltro »

vyrotek wrote: post #27
ddispaltro wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do they have an IaaS solution yet?

I sure hope so because my company uses it :) I'm sure you were trying to point out that perhaps Azure doesn't meet your criteria for IaaS (yet). But, I think CloudKick offers many services that are possible to work with Azure right now. Full VM access is just around the corner and people will be shopping for CloudKick types services very soon. My company is ready to be your first Azure customer.

Maybe we can make that happen. Ill ping some folks, email me dan@cloudkick.com and Ill keep you updated.
Post reply on HN