oops should of said the main disadvantage is it is not FreeBSD
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Aryeh Friedman <aryeh.fried...@gmail.com> wrote: > For us it is mostly cost but the other advantage (with RS at least) is > you can size the "hardware" to fit your needs and not get any more > then you need... for example when we first started our consulting firm > back in July we bought 256MB of RAM (RS sizes the Disk, CPU, > Bandwidth, etc. as a multiple of RAM) and then moved to 512MB in Sept. > and except for the 10 mins it took for RS to transfer our server image > from a 1U VM to a 2U VM (1U = 256MB/RAM) the move was completely > painless and no time and effort was needed to update the OS, 3rd party > apps, our custom made code, etc.... > > Like I said early the only downside of using RS as our primary server > provider (even though we use it for internal development only [but > since each of the 3 partners lives in a different part of the US it is > much cheaper and easier then having it in one of our houses because > none of our ISP's allow static IP's for non-business users which is > twice the cost almost]) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Tom Worster <f...@thefsb.org> > Date: Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 9:34 AM > Subject: Re: FreeBSD on Rackspace Could > To: dalesc...@shaw.ca > Cc: FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> > > > On 11/13/10 6:32 PM, "dalesc...@shaw.ca" <dalesc...@shaw.ca> wrote: > >>> but dedicated/vps does not offer what cloud computing does. >> >>What do feel are the advantages of the cloud? > > i haven't used one yet but, as far as i can tell, the interesting > differences derive from how the could platform implements network, storage > and compute elements in a distributed hardware system meshed up with a > mesh interconnect (presumably of the high-performance computing type). > > the resulting advantages for me: the storage arrays are raid 10 and all > their responsibility not mine; shared file systems are part of the > platform so i don't need to mess around with nfs; load balancing (which i > currently can't afford) is part of the network platform; so is the address > juggling needed for high availability (failover and restoration); and the > price for each vm seems to allow me maybe 2 or 3x as many hosts as i get > with dedicated servers so i can separate the db servers from the rest of > the app and assign no more memory than i need to each vm. > > in summary, it seems i can get the high-availability, load-sharing > architecture i want at a price that's beyond my budget with dedicated > hosts. > > and it looks like there's a bunch of other nice aspects that aren't > radical but will be time savers: backups, standby images, simpler sysadmin > (there's a lot less to a cloud server "slice" than a whole computer), > monitoring, persistence. > > does this begin to answer your question? > > > this weekend i tried out gentoo on a wee celeron box i have. (someone here > said gentoo was the linux most like freebsd and rackspace cloud offers > it). it's the first linux experience i've had in which i didn't feel like > a clumsy incompetent. the similarities and differences relative to freebsd > are interesting. maybe i'll write up my initial impressions. > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
