> > > > Would everyone here be in favor of a dedicated server over a cloud > > > > server from a host with good cloud infrastructure? The cloud > > > > server concept is amazing but from what I'm reading a dedicated > > > > server at the same price point far outperforms it. > > > > > > > > - Grant > > > > > > Last time I did the calculation, a dedicated or normal virtualized > > > infrastructure was more cost effective as long as you could > > > accurately predict the performance you need. > > > > > > Cloud services only really help if you need a high dynamic range > > > regarding scale and performance, e.g. a service that could get a > > > lot of new users very fast or is only really active for short time > > > spans. > > > > Doesn't a good cloud server also have potentially higher availability > > compared to dedicated? > > Potentially? Yes. > > In reality? No. > > It's not the virtualization that breaks, it's all the surrounding > infrastructure, especially Layer 2. You will not believe how fragile > that stuff can get. > > In the old days, a small slip up could isolate a small part of the > network. These days, a small slip-up easily ripples though the entire > network and takes down all of it, and sadly this is not rare. The > networking needs of VMs are radically different from the traditional, > and this is the side-effect: fragility.
Sounds like the technology isn't ready to compare favorably with dedicated yet in an "ordinary" scenario with a website to run. Maybe in a few years? The concept is amazing. I'd also like to move my desktops and even laptops to the cloud once things get solidified. Then client hardware becomes interchangeable, disposable... each physical location would only need one thin client and a bunch of USB peripherals (DisplayLink, etc). - Grant
