+1 on Dan's reply. I use a custom EC2 stack (provisioned with Chef) combined with an elastic load balancer for each app with great success.
Engine Yard requires less work up front, but if you want to customize anything you'll end up having to learn and work with Chef anyway. Biggest downside to EY is cost -- there's no reserved instances so you always pay the EC2 hourly rate + a few cents per hour. On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Dan Simpson <[email protected]> wrote: > It all depends on the size of the deployment and the complexity of your > stack. That said, I have generally been in favor of using EC2 or > rackspace cloud. The biggest difference here is more work is put on you, > as they are instance providers, and you are responsible for provisioning > those instances. Getting a redundant web app running this way requires > more work, but you control your destiny. Getting familiar with chef or > something similar can make managing your deployments easier (more work up > front though). > > If you want a more hands off approach, engine yard is a good alternative. > > --Dan > > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Kevin Ball <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey SDRuby, >> >> After experiencing too much instability that we could do nothing about, >> we've decided to move off of Heroku, and are currently evaluating our >> options. I want to throw out the question to the community: What hosting >> providers do you use for Rails applications? What have been the ups and >> downs of those providers? Do you have strong recommendations of providers >> to use or avoid? Thanks much, >> >> -Kevin >> >> -- >> SD Ruby mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > > > -- > SD Ruby mailing list > [email protected] > http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby > -- SD Ruby mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/sdruby
