I don't think most admins are worried about losing their job, I think they are worried about cloud services going down or disappearing and having nothing they can do about it, let alone information security and other factors.
The real issue, is picking the right cloud service for your organization. Some you will have great deal of control, others they do everything for you. You can also setup the contract that they are responsible for such data and if it goes away they need to compensate for the loss.
There is an impression that each of us will make a better system admin then anyone else. However in real life if we run our own servers we run into issues where you don't have the budget for the remote offsite location. You needed to hold off on those new drives to replace the failing ones. Sure cloud systems are open to vulnerabilities and human errors. However being it is suppose to be the cloud company key job to keep it running, they should have the budget to keep in business, also with a proper contract you can squarely blame them for any mistake.
Can someone explain how one gets amazing performance for the file server with cloud hosting? Replication?
For almost every single application I see the cloud being a god given gift (other than I have to convince the owners on a budget) but I can't get over the idea that file servers are much faster when local. I can't get a gig connection to a cloud service where I'm located so when those CAD guys need to access a 200mb file they won't be happy if the pipe is only 10Mbs.
> However being it is suppose to be the cloud company key job to keep it running.
Yes, supposed to be, and actually do are two different things. And most of the time you don't find out about the cloud host's deficiencies until far too late. One cloud company I had a personal linux server with got hit with a DOS attack and their response was to ignore their customer service email and phone for almost a week while trying to clean it up. Needless to say I bought another VPS elsewhere, restored by backups and cancelled my account at the original place as soon as their systems settled down enough. I couldn't possibly imagine leaving my business systems vulnerable to those kind of shenanigans.
> also with a proper contract you can squarely blame them for any mistake
Are you truly that naive? If you have an SLA with *your* client to uphold it doesn't matter if you have someone to blame or not. Your client will blame *you*. It's your decision to go with a service company that has caused you to miss your SLA so it is your fault. Period. Say that SLA violation costs you $100,000. I can bet you your annual paycheck that the agreement you signed with the cloud provider will only see you getting refunded hosting costs during the outage and not a nickel toward your actual losses. So yeah, you lost $100K on the SLA violation but good news! You're getting $250 off your cloud bill. Sweet! Er. wait...
You get what you pay for. Also while related, I don't think VPS fits directly into the cloud conversation. This would be no different then a collocation getting DOS'd
If this is supposed to be some dig against going with little cloud services and then being surprised by outages, please share your thoughts on Amazon's EBS outages that have taken many of the highest trafficked services online out 3 times in the last 2 years. Or Microsoft's multple cloud service failures that have dragged things to a halt at many businesses using Office online. Or look to Slashdot's own front page yesterday and today to see coverage of Adobe's Creative Cloud se
In my experience, the difference between VPS and cloud is the orchestration system. Cloud usually means that the customer can create and launch instances at will, while VPS need to be created by a human before releasing to the customer.
I think you need to have another look at VPS. It's been the case for several years now that you sign up for an account, pay for what you want and then an automated deployment system allows you to spin up a brand new VPS with your choice of sizing and OS all in about 60 seconds. Digital Ocean even lets you just throw some cash in your balance and then charges you per day so you can spin up and shut down as many VPSs as you like with whatever capacity you have the credit for on that day.
I just asked myself... what would John DeLorean do?
-- Raoul Duke
Wrong concern (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think most admins are worried about losing their job, I think they are worried about cloud services going down or disappearing and having nothing they can do about it, let alone information security and other factors.
Re:Wrong concern (Score:2, Interesting)
The real issue, is picking the right cloud service for your organization.
Some you will have great deal of control, others they do everything for you. You can also setup the contract that they are responsible for such data and if it goes away they need to compensate for the loss.
There is an impression that each of us will make a better system admin then anyone else. However in real life if we run our own servers we run into issues where you don't have the budget for the remote offsite location. You needed to hold off on those new drives to replace the failing ones.
Sure cloud systems are open to vulnerabilities and human errors. However being it is suppose to be the cloud company key job to keep it running, they should have the budget to keep in business, also with a proper contract you can squarely blame them for any mistake.
Re: (Score:2)
Can someone explain how one gets amazing performance for the file server with cloud hosting? Replication?
For almost every single application I see the cloud being a god given gift (other than I have to convince the owners on a budget) but I can't get over the idea that file servers are much faster when local. I can't get a gig connection to a cloud service where I'm located so when those CAD guys need to access a 200mb file they won't be happy if the pipe is only 10Mbs.
Re:Wrong concern (Score:5, Insightful)
> However being it is suppose to be the cloud company key job to keep it running.
Yes, supposed to be, and actually do are two different things. And most of the time you don't find out about the cloud host's deficiencies until far too late. One cloud company I had a personal linux server with got hit with a DOS attack and their response was to ignore their customer service email and phone for almost a week while trying to clean it up. Needless to say I bought another VPS elsewhere, restored by backups and cancelled my account at the original place as soon as their systems settled down enough. I couldn't possibly imagine leaving my business systems vulnerable to those kind of shenanigans.
> also with a proper contract you can squarely blame them for any mistake
Are you truly that naive? If you have an SLA with *your* client to uphold it doesn't matter if you have someone to blame or not. Your client will blame *you*. It's your decision to go with a service company that has caused you to miss your SLA so it is your fault. Period. Say that SLA violation costs you $100,000. I can bet you your annual paycheck that the agreement you signed with the cloud provider will only see you getting refunded hosting costs during the outage and not a nickel toward your actual losses. So yeah, you lost $100K on the SLA violation but good news! You're getting $250 off your cloud bill. Sweet! Er. wait...
Re: (Score:1)
You get what you pay for. Also while related, I don't think VPS fits directly into the cloud conversation. This would be no different then a collocation getting DOS'd
Re: (Score:2)
>You get what you pay for.
If this is supposed to be some dig against going with little cloud services and then being surprised by outages, please share your thoughts on Amazon's EBS outages that have taken many of the highest trafficked services online out 3 times in the last 2 years. Or Microsoft's multple cloud service failures that have dragged things to a halt at many businesses using Office online. Or look to Slashdot's own front page yesterday and today to see coverage of Adobe's Creative Cloud se
Re: (Score:1)
In my experience, the difference between VPS and cloud is the orchestration system. Cloud usually means that the customer can create and launch instances at will, while VPS need to be created by a human before releasing to the customer.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you need to have another look at VPS. It's been the case for several years now that you sign up for an account, pay for what you want and then an automated deployment system allows you to spin up a brand new VPS with your choice of sizing and OS all in about 60 seconds. Digital Ocean even lets you just throw some cash in your balance and then charges you per day so you can spin up and shut down as many VPSs as you like with whatever capacity you have the credit for on that day.