A small note. I was led to understand (from a fried who uses EC2 and aggressively) that xlarge instances are (usually? Always? I think the later) alone on physical hardware. So you would prefer to use xlarge instance to prevent slowdowns.
Ez 2010/10/10 Maxim Veksler <[email protected]> > On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Orna Agmon Ben-Yehuda <[email protected] > > wrote: > >> >> >> 2010/10/10 Ori Idan <[email protected]> >> >>> >>> 2010/10/10 Tom Rosenfeld <[email protected]> >>> >>> Hi, >>>> I just came across this thread from back in Aug about Amazon's cloud. >>>> >>>> I'd like to add that I have been a satisfied customer of Amazon for over >>>> a year, using their services for both consulting at at my current job where >>>> we use it to run our SaaS offering. The capabilities keep improving and the >>>> prices keep coming down. Their lowest end server is now just 2 cents an >>>> hour! >>>> >>>> There are some issues with the IO, but it is certainly adequate for all >>>> but high performance needs. We use 8 way stripped disks and get about 100 >>>> MBp/s sequential reads. >>>> >>>> If anyone wants more details, I'll be happy to share with you. >>>> >>>> -tom >>>> >>>> >>> I am considering using EC2 for a web application. >>> I am not sure how to calculate the payment per month. >>> Do I pay only for the time someone makes a request? >>> For example, I have a user who requests a certain report and it takes 1 >>> second to load the report request form, then 20 seconds to produce the >>> report and print it. >>> I understand that I pay for 21 seconds? >>> >> >> In addition to mistakes already corrected, there is another mistake of how >> long something takes. Amazon aim to provide a certain computation power >> unit, but benchmarks show that what is actually provided has high >> variability. For example, ping times to EC2 machines started rising >> significantly since Amazon announces the spot instances. See also: >> >> > > Some more input on EC2. > > Not all instances born alike. We recently ran a huge computation based on > Hadoop and you can definitely see that some nodes perform faster (I/O was > the bottleneck) then others. > > I too, when starting with EC2 made the mistake to of thinking that you only > pay for as much "CPU" as you use. Wrong! > > OTOH, I was very happy to find out that with Google AppEngine this is > actually the case: You pay for as much resources as you consume. And they DO > count "CPU Time" vs. Amazon's "instance is running time". > > Another note regarding EC2. Read bitbucket story about ec2 horrors > http://blog.bitbucket.org/. > Yet please don't get me wrong, generally EC2, S3, CloudFront, ELB and other > Amazon's services work great - Our production farm (~40 servers is hosted > there and we are relatively happy). > > Amazon's main issues are: > I/O bandwidth is funny > Occasionally peaks in connectivity time that lead to timeouts (between > zones & from the outside world). > Not so fair hypervisor: We've seen occasions when an instance "slows down" > for a couple of minutes. We assume (without being able to tell for sure) > that some bigger instance type that happen to be hosted on the same physical > server as we are got resource hungry and practically ate all our CPU time... > > > Maxim. > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-il mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il > >
_______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
