My company uses AWS heavily and has several Amazon Direct Connect network links from our points of presence into Amazon. These reduce our latency and costs.
http://aws.amazon.com/directconnect/
We would like to be able to use Heroku more extensively with our internal applications, but the dynos would need to exist inside our Amazon VPCs in order for us to get the latency and cost benefits. I can't see a way to do this.
Is there any way for Heroku customers to run their dynos inside specific Amazon VPCs?
Related
For bandwidth of 400GB per month, what EC2 instance should I use if I want to create a video streaming infrastructure to different regions?
You won't get any specific answers on questions like this. It is totally dependent on your application.
If you stored the videos in Amazon S3 and streamed videos through Amazon CloudFront, then Amazon EC2 would purely be handling user interactions and web pages, without having to serve video content at all.
For any application, the only way to know how much compute is required is to test the application under many different workloads and instance types and measure the performance. Alternatively, an application can be designed to use serverless microservices using AWS Lambda, which can automatically scale without using EC2 instances.
I'd like two use at least two Heroku regions - US and EU.
The goal is to give each user the server closest to them.
I know how to achieve this with AWS - Latency Based Routing.
Is LBR limited to 'pure AWS', or can it easily be applied to Heroku or hosting?
In any case, LBR only solves a part of the problem (end user --> web dyno). Is there a guide to working with Heroku databases / other resources cross regions?
Yes, this is completely possible, you would need to choose the AWS region for each record that matches the Heroku region in question. e.g
foobar.example.org CNAME myuseast.herokuapp.com -> latency based us-east-1
foobar.example.org CNAME myeuwest.herokuapp.com -> latency based eu-west-1
This link explains how to find the regions, eu = eu-west-1, us = us-east-1
Where are Heroku apps hosted exactly?
It is important to consider that users who have similar pings to both US and EU data centres may get routed to one one day and the other the next.
This link explains that this is possible, I have also tried it in my own AWS account just now. https://docs.aws.amazon.com/Route53/latest/DeveloperGuide/resource-record-sets-values-latency.html
I've already got an RDS instance configured and running, but currently we're still running on our old web host. We'd like to decrease latency by hosting the code within AWS.
Two concerns:
1) Future scalability
2) Redundancy ... not a huge concern but AWS does occasionally go down.
Has anyone had this problem where they just need to cheaply run what is essentially a database interface via a language such as PHP/Ruby, in 2 regions? (with one as a failover)
Does Amazon offer something that automatically manages resources, that's also cost effective?
Amazon's Elastic Beanstalk service supports both PHP and Ruby apps natively, and allows you to scale your app servers automatically.
In a second region, run a slave RDS instance off of your master (easy to set up in RDS) and have another beanstalk setup there ready as a failover.
What are the pros and cons of using dedicated servers versus Aamzon EC2 for hosting a high traffic website - that has about 2 million visitors and 5 million page views a month. The content is mostly dynamic and served from a database. Does anyone has any experience of the costs and performance for such a setup.
Amazon EC2 is going to be much more cost-effective versus dedicated servers from my experience. Should you experience a sudden rise in the volume of traffic to your site all you need to do is shell out some extra $$ to Amazon and voila your site can handle the traffic (assuming there are no coding bottlenecks). Unless you have a truly massive website (ie: Facebook) the benefits of hosting on Amazon EC2 far outweigh the risks.
One of the only risks that you take with hosting on EC2 was showcased a few months ago when the whole cloud went down, taking Foursquare, Quorra, Reddit, and other multi-million user base sites down along with it.
From a user experience I believe interaction with the cloud hosting provider is pretty much the same as interacting with a dedicated server, so the only real concern to take into account would be cost-effectiveness.
My own experience tells me that at least in this part of the world, New Zealand, where we don't yet have a local amazon server farm, Amazon provides poor performance and is one of the most expensive options for hosting busy websites. I placed some background on my blog that goes through my own experiences. http://www.printnet.co.nz/category/hosting/
I just found out about amazon EC2. I am wondering what it actually offers. I use to go with VPS servers and now I want to learn if EC2 give me the same options as a VPS with some host company.
Are there any limitations on what I can install?
Thanks
Cristian
Probably the main difference between EC2 and a conventional VPS hosting service is the pricing model. EC2 charges for CPU time (and other resources) by the hour, whereas many conventional services charge by the month (or greater). The best way to learn about EC2 would be to jump into the documentation, and then sign up for the free usage tier.
Within reason, there are no limitations on what you can install.