Comments on: Series: CRM on S3 & EC2, Part2 http://blog.apokalyptik.com/2006/10/14/series-crm-on-s3-ec2-part2/ The random things that spew forth from my brain... Mon, 16 Jan 2012 18:43:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4-alpha-19620 By: Sasa Sarunic http://blog.apokalyptik.com/2006/10/14/series-crm-on-s3-ec2-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-5994 Sasa Sarunic Sun, 01 Apr 2007 11:07:14 +0000 http://blog.apokalyptik.com/?p=143#comment-5994 There is some pretty interesting stuff called Infini disk which is basically FUSE based file system that uses S3 as it's back-end storage. I think that this is exactly the right way to go. If it works, you can forget about 160GB limit and EC2 can be used for hosting databases of practically unlimited sizes. There is some pretty interesting stuff called Infini disk which is basically FUSE based file system that uses S3 as it's back-end storage.

I think that this is exactly the right way to go. If it works, you can forget about 160GB limit and EC2 can be used for hosting databases of practically unlimited sizes.

]]> By: apokalyptik http://blog.apokalyptik.com/2006/10/14/series-crm-on-s3-ec2-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-1915 apokalyptik Tue, 31 Oct 2006 08:48:24 +0000 http://blog.apokalyptik.com/?p=143#comment-1915 What I suggest is having one dedicated server with 320GB of space, and using that as a sort of insurance policy. You want the insurance because of the possible snafu's you might run into with a relatively new technology. Well to be accurate the underlying technology is not new, but the service wrapper that amazon has placed around virtualization is very new. You can offload a very large percentage of your load to EC2/S3/SQS and you should, but as far as risk management I would still feel better knowing that I had a physical machine somewhere that was rarely if ever touched. What I suggest is having one dedicated server with 320GB of space, and using that as a sort of insurance policy. You want the insurance because of the possible snafu's you might run into with a relatively new technology. Well to be accurate the underlying technology is not new, but the service wrapper that amazon has placed around virtualization is very new. You can offload a very large percentage of your load to EC2/S3/SQS and you should, but as far as risk management I would still feel better knowing that I had a physical machine somewhere that was rarely if ever touched.

]]> By: Danny de Wit http://blog.apokalyptik.com/2006/10/14/series-crm-on-s3-ec2-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-1876 Danny de Wit Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:52:13 +0000 http://blog.apokalyptik.com/?p=143#comment-1876 By the time it took to collect my thoughts to formulate a response, you can probably tell, I'm confused about the answer. So your conclusion is don't use EC2 because of the limitations of SQL space. And go for a dedicated server with a 320 GB drive? Is that correct? Maybe a diagram can help me understand you're analysis better. I'm doing the best I can :) Danny By the time it took to collect my thoughts to formulate a response, you can probably tell, I'm confused about the answer.

So your conclusion is don't use EC2 because of the limitations of SQL space. And go for a dedicated server with a 320 GB drive?

Is that correct?

Maybe a diagram can help me understand you're analysis better. I'm doing the best I can :)

Danny

]]>