Just thoughts: There's no out-of-the-box storage panacea on AWS that would be fast+shared+persistent, yet, so you have to sacrifice. EBS and S3 can crash. SimpleDB is flat
I would try Scalr's stuff, as Donovan suggested, but it will require some hand work. On 2 июн, 20:34, Fran_K <[email protected]> wrote: > The reason we picked Scalr was because we cannot predict how far we > will have to scale and we wanted something that would attempt to adapt > for us. However, this still requires a lot more thinking about the > architecture than I anticipated. I'm now at the point where I need to > make a decision about which way to go with my data storage and I was > hoping that other Scalr users might have some experience that they > would like to share. > > When we first started building our app we only had a few data objects > to store for each user and we thought to use Rails to do this, but > testing showed that this did not scale very well and there were a few > problems with the system that I wanted to avoid. After analysis I > determined that the app state could be expressed as a big JSON string > and that most users would only have one or two saved states. As I > thought about how to elimiate complexity it seemed that I could create > some app servers to handle read and write REST calls and store the > states for each user on disk somewhere. I can SQS if my servers start > to bog down and I am waiting for more instances to appear to handle > the work. Well and good, this runs a hell of lot faster than Rails, > and the complexity of the code is not very great. But now I am faced > with answering a question in order to decide which way to go. > > I can store my state strings in S3 and make the requests for state by > a user be a redirected call to S3, or I can store the states in EBS > and hope that the single instance can handle the load (and use a > sharding strategy if needed). The thing I like about S3 is that I can > just let the farm grow and shrink as needed since the storage is not > limited to one instance, but I am worried about the access time. It > seems that EBS would be faster, but my gut tells me that I'll have to > be sharding soon and that I will have to intervene on that a lot. > > Also, the cost seems to favor S3 for my app since my state strings are > only a couple of K, and S3 charges per G not per number of accesses. > > Does anyone have any experience with this kind of issue and would mind > sharing their experience? > > Thanks, > > --fran --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scalr-discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/scalr-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
