51–60 of 233 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You could build that same server for $15,000 through Dell, lease it at $400/month (OpEx), and colo it with a 1GB/s blended bandwidth connection billed at the 95th percentile for $150/month. And then magically maintain it for free?
hopefully with your spare 3437 dollars a month you could figure out how to ever maintain such a thing.
I have posted a few times about how absurdly expensive all the cloud providers are. If you have a baseline load you should be co-locating bare metal. Any excess capacity you need should spill over into your AWS/GCE/Azure account. For example: A dedicated m4.16xLarge EC2 instance in AWS is $3987/month. You could build that same server for $15,000 through Dell, lease it at $400/month (OpEx), and colo it with a 1GB/s bl…
It's no secret that AWS is a rip off on instance pricing. Use the competitors if you worry so much about pricing.
- assume $100/TB for cloud data transfer
- assume one employee full time equivalent to manage colo'd servers ($10,000/mo), plus $30/TB data transfer
The break even point for the colo'd setup from a networking perspective is:
10,000 + 30X = 100X
X = 10,000/70 = 142 (TB/month)
Weaknesses of this model:
- Data transfer only. Depending on what else you're doing you could also save a lot on compute and storage.
- I don't know that much about how colocated data transfer would be priced ... i.e. do you need overprovision to guarantee availability, etc.
- one employee to handle servers to replicate the Amazon AWS experience ... could be highly variable depending on what AWS features you are using.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You could build that same server for $15,000 through Dell, lease it at $400/month (OpEx), and colo it with a 1GB/s blended bandwidth connection billed at the 95th percentile for $150/month. And then magically maintain it for free?
Can probably hire a someone at minimum wage to watch it 24/7 in case it spontaneously combusts.
Minimum wage => You get what you pay for.
I've analyzed the cost of cloud services to death (I've worked for a couple of them) and the only way they aren't great deals is if you don't need high quality operations (i.e. if you can deal with slow-downs or occasional outages then you can do better elsewhere). Otherwise, if you're small-scale then these marginal cost differences don't matter, and if you're larger scale then call up these cloud providers and get yourself a discount off the list price.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You could build that same server for $15,000 through Dell, lease it at $400/month (OpEx), and colo it with a 1GB/s blended bandwidth connection billed at the 95th percentile for $150/month. And then magically maintain it for free?
hopefully with your spare 3437 dollars a month you could figure out how to ever maintain such a thing.
It really, really depends on on your use case, but there are some scenarios where bare metal just makes more sense. Also there are ones where cloud makes everything much easier.
North America-oriented B2B app that's a JavaScript SPA witch connects to some lightweight services fronting a database? I think that's a great contender for the cloud.
500-node Hadoop cluster running 24/7 with heavy load? You are going to see some huge savings by maintaining a Datacenter. You can use the extra 1.7MM/mo. to set up some robust networking equipment and have few people on-site.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're comparing apples to oranges -- if you want a couple TB of locally attached storage, you'd get an i3.2xlarge for $450/month with 1.9TB of NVMe SSD (plus 8 cores CPU + 60GB RAM). Using EBS volumes with provisioned IOPS give you some advantages that you don't get with a bare SSD -- like snapshot support and the ability to easily detach it and move it to another server.
you're right, the performance of the local storage on i3 instances is a lot better than normal EBS but still nothing close to what you would get from just buying an Intel P4500 or similar though. http://www.aerospike.com/benchmarks/amazon-ec2-i3-performanc...
I have posted a few times about how absurdly expensive all the cloud providers are. If you have a baseline load you should be co-locating bare metal. Any excess capacity you need should spill over into your AWS/GCE/Azure account. For example: A dedicated m4.16xLarge EC2 instance in AWS is $3987/month. You could build that same server for $15,000 through Dell, lease it at $400/month (OpEx), and colo it with a 1GB/s bl…
Cherry-picking a bit there. You're entering a 3-year commitment with the Dell lease, but not with the EC2 lease. Take a 3-year RI on that EC2 instance, and the price drops considerably. If you also take away the 'dedicated' requirement, the 3-year RI is about twice as expensive, not ten times.
Edit: correction from Johnny555 above: this top-tier server doesn't have a 'dedicated' option, so there's not an 'extra' cost for that. It's just twice the price, if you do a 3-year commitment (as you are doing for the dell)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
hopefully with your spare 3437 dollars a month you could figure out how to ever maintain such a thing.
Where can I find competent sysadmins capable of managing a system like that on their own for $40,000 a year?