Just saw your email between all the others .. Pinterest, Instagram, Netflix, Shazam, NASDAQ, Cycle Computing ( http://arstechnica.com/business/2011/09/30000-core-cluster-built-on-amazon-ec2-cloud/) .. that list could go on and on, see http://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/ for some more.
For a small all-in-one web server, any kind of web hosting is fine, and Amazon would most certainly be the pricier option. Sébastien On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Chris Travers <chris.trav...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:18 AM, Vincent Veyron <vv.li...@wanadoo.fr>wrote: > >> Le mardi 21 août 2012 à 01:33 -0400, Sébastien Lorion a écrit : >> >> > >> > >> > Since Amazon has added new high I/O instance types and EBS volumes, >> > anyone has done some benchmark of PostgreSQL on them ? >> > >> >> I wonder : is there a reason why you have to go through the complexity >> of such a setup, rather than simply use bare metal and get good >> performance with simplicity? >> >> For instance, the dedibox I use for my app (visible in sig) costs 14,00 >> euros/month, and sits at .03% load average with 5 active users; you can >> admin it like a home pc. >> > > The main use cases I know of are relatively small instances where the web > server and db server for an app may be on the same system. > >> >> >> -- >> Vincent Veyron >> http://marica.fr/ >> Gestion informatique des sinistres d'assurances et des dossiers >> contentieux pour le service juridique >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) >> To make changes to your subscription: >> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general >> > >
