AMAZON AWS – how do You optimize resources
Good day!
Quite a long time use AMAZON AWS if you require more computational power. Satisfied, well, everything. Briefly, under tasks start and constant server and spot. Use different instance types and graphics auto start/stop.
Overall, everything is very comfortable regulated, to a first approximation, when the number up to a dozen servers and with my direct understanding of the whole kitchen. And of course, accounting, export/archiving/disposal of the stored data.
I wonder what Your "gentleman's set" to optimize resources and, ultimately, costs?
Thank you for Your comments, recommendations!
...
Question, for control over hundreds of servers*, of which can run simultaneously, for example, the same dozen, but every server when there is a "ballast" of the disks of snapshots are images, etc. paraphernalia. Elastic IP that migrate can be tied as a permanent. And this is all you need to know (to know where to look).
Still, size matters, and if "10" significant savings brings the running servers in the user labor time (up to ~ 60%) / replication of data to a more powerful spot for quick data processing and subsequent terminate into oblivion. For "100+" is already more comprehensive question.
Perhaps implemented storage AMI/Snapshot in Glacier or have a cunning scheme? Question, by the way, very interesting — if I am not mistaken in Glacier, you can store the files/data beyond the "AWS console", and the idea is to feed for as little as 0.01 to Glacier AMI.
I would like to reflect on the prospect of expansion, but perhaps the division of labor, knowingly implemented "IAM". But if You gave (plan) a "100+" server pool with my ballast?
... Or "Elasticfox", scripts and tables + drill, in terms of getting information from customers, which would then dock the tails?
And maybe, in General, there is a fundamental reason to move to competitors for permanent residence, to minimize costs, and this is a task for porting and have to justify much, can anyone have experience?
Steam tables were compared only RAM and CPU, pulling the "ears" to the prices of AMAZONA.
Clouds foreign
the
Cloud domestic:
the
The data is sorted by type and price
As can be seen from the tables are compared, only "Windows" servers, as they are 99% in my Park.
PS:
I apologize in advance for mnogabukav, but the question is, "What's Your "gentleman's set"" in AWS as stubby looks.
* of course interesting to all useful opinions, "100+" — a kind of imaginative value.
Article based on information from habrahabr.ru
Quite a long time use AMAZON AWS if you require more computational power. Satisfied, well, everything. Briefly, under tasks start and constant server and spot. Use different instance types and graphics auto start/stop.
Overall, everything is very comfortable regulated, to a first approximation, when the number up to a dozen servers and with my direct understanding of the whole kitchen. And of course, accounting, export/archiving/disposal of the stored data.
I wonder what Your "gentleman's set" to optimize resources and, ultimately, costs?
Thank you for Your comments, recommendations!
...
Question, for control over hundreds of servers*, of which can run simultaneously, for example, the same dozen, but every server when there is a "ballast" of the disks of snapshots are images, etc. paraphernalia. Elastic IP that migrate can be tied as a permanent. And this is all you need to know (to know where to look).
Still, size matters, and if "10" significant savings brings the running servers in the user labor time (up to ~ 60%) / replication of data to a more powerful spot for quick data processing and subsequent terminate into oblivion. For "100+" is already more comprehensive question.
Perhaps implemented storage AMI/Snapshot in Glacier or have a cunning scheme? Question, by the way, very interesting — if I am not mistaken in Glacier, you can store the files/data beyond the "AWS console", and the idea is to feed for as little as 0.01 to Glacier AMI.
I would like to reflect on the prospect of expansion, but perhaps the division of labor, knowingly implemented "IAM". But if You gave (plan) a "100+" server pool with my ballast?
... Or "Elasticfox", scripts and tables + drill, in terms of getting information from customers, which would then dock the tails?
And maybe, in General, there is a fundamental reason to move to competitors for permanent residence, to minimize costs, and this is a task for porting and have to justify much, can anyone have experience?
Steam tables were compared only RAM and CPU, pulling the "ears" to the prices of AMAZONA.
Clouds foreign
| Type | Cloud | name (instance-types) | GiB RAM | CPU | Windows Usage (per Hour) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | win azure | Small (A1) | 1,70 | 1 | $0,090 |
| S | AWS | Small Instance | 1,70 | 1 | $0,091 |
| S | hpcloud | Small | 2,00 | 2 | $0,120 |
| S | rackspace | 2 GB | 2,00 | 2 | $0,120 |
| S | softlayer | 2 Core + 2GB RAM | 2,00 | 2 | $0,250 |
| M | win azure | Medium (A2) | 3,50 | 2 | $0,180 |
| M | AWS | Medium Instance | 3,75 | 2 | $0,182 |
| M | hpcloud | Medium | 4,00 | 2 | $0,240 |
| M | rackspace | 4 GB | 4,00 | 2 | $0,240 |
| M | softlayer | 4 Core + 4GB RAM | 4,00 | 4 | $0,390 |
| L | win azure | Large (A3) | 7 | 4 | $0,360 |
| L | AWS | Large Instance | 7,50 | 4 | $0,364 |
| L | softlayer | 4 Core + 8GB RAM | 8,00 | 4 | $0,440 |
| L | hpcloud | Large | 8,00 | 4 | $0,480 |
| L | rackspace | 8 GB | 8,00 | 4 | $0,480 |
Cloud domestic:
| Type | Cloud | name (instance-types) | GiB RAM | CPU | Windows Usage (per Hour) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | selectel.ru | Small | 1,70 | 1 | $0,063 |
| S | oversun.ru | Small | 2,00 | 2,6 | $0,070 |
| S | AWS | Small Instance | 1,70 | 1 | $0,091 |
| S | scalaxy.ru | Small | 1,50 | 41 | $0,155 |
| M | selectel.ru | Medium | 3,75 | 2 | $0,132 |
| M | oversun.ru | Medium | 4 | 2,6 | $0,180 |
| M | AWS | Medium Instance | 3,75 | 2 | $0,182 |
| M | scalaxy.ru | Medium | 4,00 | 41 | $0,321 |
| L | selectel.ru | Large | 7,50 | 4 | $0,264 |
| L | oversun.ru | Large | 8 | $0,323 | |
| L | AWS | Large Instance | 7,50 | 4 | $0,364 |
| L | scalaxy.ru | Large | 8,00 | 41 | $0,588 |
The data is sorted by type and price
As can be seen from the tables are compared, only "Windows" servers, as they are 99% in my Park.
PS:
I apologize in advance for mnogabukav, but the question is, "What's Your "gentleman's set"" in AWS as stubby looks.
* of course interesting to all useful opinions, "100+" — a kind of imaginative value.
Комментарии
Отправить комментарий