EC2 Instance Update – X1 (SAP HANA) and T2.Nano (Websites)
aws.amazon.com
aws.amazon.com
>The X1 instances will be powered by up to four Intel® Xeon® E7 processors. The processors have high memory bandwidth and large L3 caches, both designed to support high-performance, memory-bound applications. With over 100 vCPUs, these instances will be able to handle highly concurrent workloads with ease.
Can't wait to launch one of these.
http://documentation.online.net/en/serveur-dedie/offres/serv...
EDIT: This is not to hate on AWS. I love AWS! (I do devops and infrastructure). Its to say, if you need what AWS offers, buy it. If you don't, architect your solution around other providers.
I have been able to provide the same level of uptime over ~15 years (in various environments, ranging from corporate america to the department of energy to startups) with physical servers as I have with AWS. The initial capital expenditure outlay is higher, but its cheaper over 1-3 years than AWS.
AWS isn't the only solution out there. Its great for proof of concept, its great when you don't know how much capacity you're going to need, but it is very expensive comparatively.
You're forgetting the biggest part: you're also paying for the flexibility. Subject to availability, you can provision and deprovision AWS resources at will, which gives you far greater granularity than you can do with your own hardware.
This flexibility enables you to save in the long run if you manager your resources appropriately, but it also comes at a per-unit premium.
I don't know if EC2 is done this way, but imagine if the T2.micro class was running on these servers (to save physical footprint). At 1.3¢ per hour, the server would bring in $227k/year.
Obviously, that's different today.
It's amazing to see the progress from anti-cloud (or private-cloud) to "we're cloud only" within that timeframe (I'm referring to companies that was hard-on on-premise).
AFAIK, SAP HANA is being used by NBA (NBA.com/Stats), NFL, NHL (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=754248) to provide real time statistics for the whole league. I wonder if they want to move their infrastructure to AWS.
PS: I work for SAP
My take is that people are doing it piecemeal. The datacenter guys got a mandate to make everything cloudy because of the obvious benefits (scale, provisioning time, lower TCO), but the data / application teams had already invested in something like HANA. If you can just forklift everything up to the cloud, there's at least the theory that you can start to peel off bits as they need to and integrate further with Amazon. If you're starting a streaming ingest process, it's appealing to forklift your existing batch ingest, then use Amazon's services to build the new one. Similar with DB upgrades (RDS), backups (S3 / glacier), or anything else that has a dedicated service. But the first thing to do is get the core application running so you're not trying to patch around some unholy hybrid cloud mess.
edit: let alone the fact I could take it down when not in use. That's a ridiculously cool thought. the price of this thing all together is insane.
I can't wait to spin up a 64 node cluster of these new X1's.
If you have Droplets with private networking you can communicate within that data center but other Droplets in the data center could still eavesdrop on your packets. To feel secure you need to encrypt data that goes between your droplets.
As for iptables: if you don't need a port open, don't open it.