Re: CEO's head in the Cloud
- From: LB <moabrivers@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: hagan@xxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 14:20:30 -0600
Thanks to everyone for their comments. Since I posted the original
question, I've hit the books pretty hard to get up to speed on all of the
offerings (including Jeremiah Wilton's webcast from Sentrigo, a few PPT
discussions, the OTN site, the Amazon site and more). For our case, we
already have a "private cloud" as one poster put it wherein we have two
geographically distinct datacenters running our databases and providing
failover. These are Tier 3 datacenters so we've had great uptime success
with them. We are using RAC and DG so we're covered for HA and DR. Our
internal storage is all FC based to clustered filers. Yes, the costs to get
us to this point were significant and our hardware does take depreciation
hits over time leading us to acquire more. Truth be told, we've actually
been placing encrypted backups in Amazon's S3 cloud for quite some time as
an additional layer of protection. It's the whole "let's put everything in
the cloud" that had me initially worried (i.e., the database servers, the
middle tier servers, the web servers, etc.).
The cloud seems like a great place for dev/test/staging environments but
I've not seen the full blown case studies of large OLTP systems shifting
into the cloud and that could be due to my lack of finding one. Does anyone
have a success story here?
I like the idea of spinning up sites in the various geographic regions of
the world for testing or demo purposes however and that seems like something
that could be a win for us. I don't know though that shifting our current
setup to a virtualized, non-RAC, iSCSI-based solution is the best thing to
do at this point but I am now in a "let's see what happens" mode.
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 10:32 AM, Craig Hagan <hagan@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Like anything, "it depends"
>
> Running a data center with high speed connectivity to the internet
> and a modest amount of redundancy is a fairly expensive proposition.
> Unless you're a fairly large company, you're going to get hit by a lot of up
> step function costs without the ability to amortize them across a great deal
> of services. Obviously, if you don't need high speed true Internet
> connectivity (just serving local buildings), then the step functions will be
> slightly lower for you.
>
> A solution that folks have done is to rent entire servers in someone else's
> datacenter. Think of this as something very much like a cloud situation
> save that you're purchasing an entire machine and/or rack position.
>
> The concept of the cloud is that you purchase in very small increments of
> hardware; the conceptual ideal is that you'd only pay for the marginal cost
> of service that you need. Currently you pay for small integer chunks of a
> unit of hardware provided by system virtualization.
>
> The pro with this is that you literally pay for what you use. If you don't
> need much equipment *or* if you need a lot of stuff for a very short period
> of time, then you can avoid paying a large amount of money.
>
> The con is that if you need an awful lot of hardware for an extended period
> of time then may find it cheaper to do it yourself.
>
> -- craig
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Guillermo Alan Bort <cicciuxdba@xxxxxxxxx
> > wrote:
>
>> but is cloud really more cost effective? and what are the reasons it is
>> cost effective?
>> Alan.-
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Jeremiah Wilton
>> <jwilton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>
>>> On Jun 3, 2010, at 5:42 AM, "Powell, Mark" <mark.powell2@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> If you have to give up control of what versions of software you run then
>>>> I do not see how you could even consider making such a migration.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Who says you have to give up control of software versions? On most IaaS
>>> cloud platforms (including Amazon), you can run any Linux or Windows, and
>>> any software on top of that you want. I'm not sure what restriction you are
>>> referring to.
>>>
>>> Yes cloud is an annoying buzzword. It is also an actual real thing that
>>> does stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeremiah Wilton
>>> Blue Gecko, Inc.
>>> http://www.bluegecko.net
>>> --
>>> //www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> .- ... . -.-. .-. . - -- . ... ... .- --. .
>
> Craig I. Hagan
> hagan(at)cih.com
>
> "Tout ce qui est exagéré est insignifiant.": ("All that is exaggerated
> is insignificant.")
>
> Talleyrand
>
>
Other related posts:
