We run their on-prem in our colo, and it works great for us.
We run their on-prem in our colo, and it works great for us.
colo == renting space/cooling/power from a datacenter provider to run your own servers. on-prem == on premise installs/support
They have two revenue models, SaaS and Selling you support [1]. Giltlab has a "loss leader strategy" like many online businesses. The difference is that in this case, their free plan will grow so exponentially fast, it will become a huge cost center.
Also, to add to my simplistic post above, colo wasn't meant to only imply Gitlab having to run everything, for example, they could go with a managed provider, and have them run the network/hardware site of things. This is also still substantially less expensive than the cloud, when your biggest bills will be storage and bandwidth ( which of course, is my assumption ). From their tech postings, it seems their problem domain doesn't allow them to utilize s3 or any other other massive scale distributed storage, so they have been primarily utilizing block storage.[2][3]
[1]https://about.gitlab.com/products/ [2]https://about.gitlab.com/2015/01/03/the-hardware-that-powers... [3]https://about.gitlab.com/2016/11/10/why-choose-bare-metal/
Dedicated hosting is similar to colocated hosting with the only difference being the physical server is rented to you by the data center. This is different from cloud hosting because unlike cloud hosting, with dedicated servers you are the only customer using the physical server that is located in the data center.
An off-shoot of dedicated hosting is a VPS (virtual private server.) VPS can be seen as a mix of cloud and dedicated in that the physical server's resources are split between x customers but each customer has their own virtual machine with root access.
[0]: https://about.gitlab.com/2017/03/02/why-we-are-not-leaving-t...