> -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Sunday, July 06, 2003 11:13 AM > To: CF-Talk > Subject: RE: CrystalTech says ALL variables must be locked > > > It's very easy after a somewhat involved gearing up phase > > (deciding what goes in the image and so forth). > > I don't see how that's any more complicated than setting up a single > dedicated server without virtualization.
At the very least there's licensing issues - there may also be "hardware" issues - remember that you must find drivers/packages for the emulated hardware, not the physical hardware. The folks from CFX Hosting have already indicated that they had to do some "massaging" - for example determining a way to let the end use "reboot" the system. I'm not saying it's hard, just that it's not (quite) as easy as a dedicated machine install. > > After that you've definitely got more costs with the VPS - > > licensing issues (which you've already mentioned) for OSs > > and support software and configuration issues. > > I agree that software costs may be higher, but in general, software costs > are a small amount of the total cost of a deployed application. In the web > hosting world, of course, this may be less true than elsewhere, I suppose. I think that it is - but still maintenance is a larger cost, I think. But, at least after the initial gearing up phase, there's very little "development" costs in the hosting world. > > A simple example is that with multiple isolated instances > > of CFMX running I can apply an updater once, OS service > > packs once and so forth - with a VPS you'd have to do this > > for each VM. > > > > An isolated instance of CFMX is much less likely to cross- > > over and cause problems in other accounts than a shared > > instance and a VPS is even less likely. But the maintenance > > cost for the VPS is higher simply because, in effect, you're > > managing multiple "machines". > > There are plenty of tools in both the Windows and Unix world for > maintaining > multiple machines. With those tools, it's not significantly more difficult > to maintain 100 machines than it is to maintain 10. In addition, from a > security standpoint, it's got to be significantly easier to deploy virtual > machines; you don't have to worry about untrusted users, and everyone can > have administrative rights in their own VM. But do those automation support VMs yet? (I don't know.) If the tools are there then you're most likely correct - but if they're still coming... Even with that supporting 100 machines is ALWAYS harder than 10 if only for the fact that no matter how much you try to standardize something is always going to come up - and with 100 machines it's that much more likely. (Our facilities team support 40-100 dedicated servers - all "standardized". More machines means more work even if you take advantage of short cuts and tool sets.) > On the flip side, if a "machine" breaks down, you can redeploy it in a few > minutes from your source image, without causing downtime to anyone else; > the > individual pieces of software within the image can often be simpler (in > the > case of CF, you could use the "regular" versions of CFMX instead of CFMX > for > J2EE), and if an update would break your code, you can more easily forego > it. Absolutely true... however if a software machine "breaks down" then it's definitely a software problem. And software problems are always more expensive and difficult to fix than hardware problems (in terms of time and diagnostics). Also I'm unclear as to the mechanics here... if a VPS breaks down nad has to be rebuilt how does that affect other VPSs running on the same physical machine? I also agree that using cheaper versions of software is a HUGE plus - but this does seem to be a benefit only for CF. Needing to license separate OSes and tools may very well override that "savings" (at least on windows). I think this is why most hosts seem to be offering shared services with VPSs - you still have shared metrics and SQL server in all the plans I've seen for example. I'm really not arguing the point with you - I think that VPS are great and will revolutionize the hosting industry. But I also think there are cost and other benefits to application isolation that may be attractive to some users. Jim Davis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=4 FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4
