my disaster plan is an open ended ticket to mexico! :) kidding bi-daily backups etc....
The thing is even with all those backup plans it just adds more to the costs of running in a cloud. On Sep 8, 12:50 pm, Barry Beattie <barry.beat...@gmail.com> wrote: > Steve: > > what's the Data Center's/your's disaster recovery plan?** > > How critical is it for you to deliver, say, 99.5% (or whatever in your > SLA) uptime to your customers? > > no criticism, not having a go, just curious if these are factors to > consider (what you've got Vs what EC2 can do for you). > > me: no affil/bias either way. > > B > > ** IIRC, there were a couple of P-o-P's inside the WTC ... until Sept > 11, that is (it's all about managing risk... and sometimes mitigating > all the risk just costs too much to be competitive in business) > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Steve Onnis <st...@cfcentral.com.au> wrote: > > That's just it though. > > > I own all of my hardware outright, so the only costs at the moment for > > us is the data centre costs which current is a little over 2k a month > > and includes 100 Gb of data. I have full control of security, > > firewalls, the servers, environments and if needed i can walk up to > > the server, plug a USB drive in and either do backups or transfer > > large amounts of data to my servers. I have a full rack available to > > me and i agree that if i was looking to expand, then the cost of > > hardware will be more than a new instance in the cloud. > > > Looking at the figures starting out fresh, the TCO is much higher with > > the typical data centre infrastructure on a hardware level and > > possible hardware maintenance level but the ongoing costs of a cloud > > seems to be just as high or higher than traditional data center > > services for running systems. > > > Yes cloud scaling is nice but when then ongoing costs of basic > > infrastructure ends up being more what would be the compelling > > argument to move to a cloud? > > > Steve > > > On Sep 8, 11:43 am, Chong <kck...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I have an ex colleague that work projects uses EC2... how do you arrive at > >> 450-500 per instance excluding data? > > >> With my discussions with him and a few others, it is very hard to estimate > >> your actual usage till you get on it. > > >> For me the potential lies in > > >> - Ability to exist beyond different regions (the likely hood of all the > >> datacenters going down in all the region is very very small) > >> - scalable (you can switch the instance type, and I also believe there > >> is > >> the ability to create/increase capacity via code/conditions) > >> - Not needing to worry about hardware > > >> So for my understand so far, for you to get maximum benefit from EC2 is to > >> architect the app/site whereby it can exists between different "regions" , > >> know how to interface with EC2 to scale when needed... not needing to worry > >> about hardware is common with any hosting provider, cloud or non cloud. > > >> Besides the fact that it is cheaper, due to scale of economics. > > >> Just my uneducated 2 cents :) > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "cfaussie" group. > > To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > cfaussie+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cfaussie" group. To post to this group, send email to cfaussie@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cfaussie+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cfaussie?hl=en.
