Difference between cloud and virtualization
Ops: This does not apply to ServerFault as it focuses on architecture programming.
I have the following questions regarding the differences between cloud and virtualization.
-
How is the cloud different from virtualization?
-
Currently I tried to find out the prices of Rackspace, Amazone and all similar cloud providers, I found that our current 6 dedicated servers are cheaper than their prices. So how can you argue that the cloud is cheaper? Is it cheaper only in comparison with regular hosting?
-
We reorganized our infrastructure in a virtual environment to reduce or tune the overhead at the point of failure, without having to rewrite any piece of code that was already written for earlier configuration. Therefore, the transition to virtualization does not require any reprogramming. But is the cloud completely different and would require a complete reprogramming?
-
Is it really worth re-coding when our current IT costs are 3-4x lower than cloud hosting, including raid backups and all kinds of clustering for high availability?
-
New programming architecture means new training overheads, new testing methods, and new deployment patterns, does this justify the use of "scope on demand"?
-
We have a current development architecture with simple ASP.NET WebServices on the server side with no local context and on the Flex / Silverlight client side that offers a pretty good REST architecture and scalability. How is the cloud different from the REST deployment model?
-
When storing SQL Server or MySQL offers pretty good replication and high availability, what is the advantage in the cloud?
-
Data Warranty, one of our vendors hosting some other client application in the cloud (one of the most used) lost all hard disk (virtual) and entire module in the first 6 months. The second provider said it was his duty to make a backup, I agree, but no provider gives an SLA to guarantee the data, they give 99% uptime. However, in most business applications, uptime is less important than data integrity. In our 10 years with dedicated hosting, we only had one hard drive failure. This prevents me from being cloud skeptical and losing control of the data. And I feel like it's just a big marketing buzz to sell virtualization in various forms.
-
Data size, currently all providers pay very heavy for big data, if you only host below 100GB of the cloud might be a good alternative, but I think virtual servers and dedicated servers above 100GB for multiple TB are still cheaper. Why pay so high on the cloud when there is no guarentee data and also nothing about redundancy.
(I would like SO to have something to spell check for Internet Explorer, sorry for the misspelling in my post)
source to share
- Virtualization is basically one physical computer pretending to be multiple computing environments; cloud computing is many different computers pretending to be the same computing environment, allowing for easier scaling. Of course, cloud computing will typically be virtualized to optimize resource use. Both of them, however, can be seen as forms of abstraction.
- It depends on what you measure as cost - for raw hardware it can be about the same, but in commercial environments there is usually one admin for forty servers, but for a cloud that goes for one admin for 1000 servers, so that's the labor cost ... What many people buy with the cloud is not just hardware, but a computing platform, so the cost of the software is offset as well. The real value proposition here is the commodity prices - you can get started without a lot of capital outlay for servers, just a low monthly fee to get started easily and flexibility - the ability to scale up and down with different demands. For example, tax department servers receive massive blows at the end of the tax year,but hardly needed for the rest of the year. It would be wasteful if the tax department had enough server capacity to handle the end-of-year load and have those servers down for the rest of the year.
- It depends on what type of cloud service you buy - raw infrastructure (like hard disk space), platform (like virtualized server or cluster), or an entire cloud solution. To develop APIs for cloud applications, you will need to redesign and redesign the solution.
- Cloud computing is a strategy, not a goal in its own right. If the benefits of the strategy match the needs of your business, then this may be the right decision, but if you are not using the attributes of cloud computing - flexibility to change resources according to demand, pricing of goods (whether for you or your customers), or the ability to offer access to your systems to customers without requiring administrator assistance - then you might be better off just running your own servers, especially if you just have stable long-term demand.
- The question here is, does scaling on demand justify the development cost for you?
- REST and the cloud aren't really very different in this scenario - they are both APIs for a scalable system. The main difference in this scenario is that to scale it, you have to buy the next server and configure it, whereas to scale the cloud solution, you simply include another resource from the cloud providers.
- Again, it is up to you to decide if cloud storage has advantages over you and outside the Sql database.
- Managing your data is probably one of the biggest hurdles for many cloud-related systems. If your data is critical, sensitive, and confidential, then hosting it with a third party may not be an option, regardless of any other benefits.
- The cost of one technology over another is only a fraction of what you should consider. Perhaps hosting in the cloud is attractive in the short term because you can test the market for your service without buying large server farms. Once the request is validated, you invest in the servers.
Cloud computing is not magic, it is a technology solution for a very specific market need - if you don't have that need, then you probably won't be using cloud computing.
source to share
- virtualization is usually performed on a local metal and ovises excellent hardware independence, etc .; "cloud" means moving processing to another data center (which often uses virtualization in implementation).
- Pricing can be cheaper for startups in particular - and this offers a huge opportunity to "scale up" the service in the short term. Either start marketing or (for example) bulk data processing. But for my purposes, local servers are also cheaper; -p If you have a fairly constant / expected load and can afford the cost of starting metal, metal is cheaper in many cases. But if your volumes are very low, perhaps the cloud is the best way to get a resilient platform without paying a lot of hardware and engineering costs.
- it depends on what you interpret as "cloud". Many cloud hosts offer very limited sandboxes with different programming paradigms; however, some services (which can still be described as cloud) offer full access to the virtual machine, but still with a pivot, etc .; in the latter case, the same code should work without much modification.
- I think you already answered that (in your specific case, it might be different for other consumers)
(also most of the rest)
Also; note that there may be legal / data issues why you need to maintain strong control over the data; sending it to a third party (possibly in a different legal jurisdiction) may not be possible and / or desirable.
source to share