Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
My portal will be mainly accessed in India and it involves uploading/viewing of images which means good data transfer will be involved.
If I host my portal on servers located in India; surely it will be faster to access the pages. But I want to personally use Amazon web services. Do we have option in Amazon so that we can host our tomcat server and save images on some servers located in India ; or at max. in Singapore so that access is fairly faster.
Amazon Web Services offers several AWS datacenter Regions for most of their Products & Services within their steadily expanding global infrastructure, amongst those the Asia Pacific (Singapore) Region (usually referred to as ap-southeast-1).
Furthermore they do offer even more so called edge locations for Amazon CloudFront, which is their Content delivery network (CDN) alike web service for content delivery.
You can see an overview of the current regions and edge locations on their Global Infrastructure map.
There is an API oriented Regions and Endpoints listing as well, see e.g. those for the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) (please note that not every region does necessarily support every single available product, especially beta offerings are usually available in us-east-1 only initially).
Consequently you should be fine using ap-southeast-1 for your use case, though as usual you might want to give it a try before settling on this, which is fairly easy to do by means of the AWS Free Usage Tier offering.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm trying to deploy my Laravel app to AWS server and I got two options:
ECS services which allow me to use docker to manage the number of services I need (Ram, CPU ..etc)
AWS eCommerce Platform to set monthly plan services (static number of Ram, CPU, and storage according to the plan)
So which one should I use for my e-commerce platform? comparing should contain:
performance: which one is better to deal with API requests (I heard docker slows down the processing)
price: is it safer to choose a monthly plan instead of cost by view or resources?
security: AWS offers more security options on the AWS e-commerce platform
The issue with managing your own instance is that you have to work out security aspects deeply especially if you are handling payments or credit card information. Considering e-commerce site this may be at the core of requirement. Personally i will go for a managed service rather than ECS, as you be spending a lot of time configuring and securing ECS.IN ECS case you have to buy a SSL certificate on top, plus penetration testing to make sure site is secure etc.
The managed platform is hopefully already PCI-DSS compliant and easy to configure.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm friends with an owner of a small creative business (with multiple departments) and until now they have been using a dedicated server (via a 3rd party) for a lot of internal projects and they've been known to iframe a few small dev projects (like photo galleries, one page sites etc...) off and on for some of their clients (some with hi traffic sites).
They're looking to switch from the dedicated server to a cloud environment. The owner is enamored with amazon's cloud services, but still wanted some alternative options they also want the new environment to mirror the current one as much as possible (linux/centOS, PHP 5.3, mysql databases) but with the ability to scale when desired.
So the misconceptions I need cleared up and questions I have are:
1) I always assumed amazon's cloud service was more suitable for high end high traffic complex web application (Netflix, pinterest, instagram etc...) rather than the typical server use listed above. Is this correct?
2) Is it possible to mirror their current setup on amazon?
3) If number 1 is not true, but they instead chose rackspace, could they run heavy web apps like Netflix, pinterest, instagram on a rackspace cloud server if they ever decided to do something that advanced (is rackspace scaleable in the same way ec2 is)?
1) Amazon AWS is also suitable for this environment, or even smaller ones (they offer instances as small as "Micro", which are far less capable than what you are describing all the way up to GPU compute clusters).
2) Yes. That is a very common setup for an AWS-based solution. In fact, I recently migrated something similar from Rackspace to AWS.
3) #1 is true. However, you can certainly mix what runs on Rackspace and in the AWS cloud. Keep in mind latency and security issues if the two component solutions need to communicate with each other. Rackspace also has a cloud offering, but it is not as mature as Amazons.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 10 years ago.
Improve this question
We run a busy web app, with most traffic being USA based. Our IT department is currently in the process of migrating our web server to the Amazon AWS EC2 environment and I'd like to make sure we set it up correctly geographically ...
Currently, the test environment AMI instance they set up is in the USA West region (North California). However, our traffic originates much more from Eastern than Western/Mountain regions (though the latter are hardly negligible). Our original hosting server is in Texas.
1) I think we will need to move the test AMI instance to USA East (Virginia) region where most of our traffic is. Is it easy to "move" or "mirror" an AMI to another region? Ideally, our primary instance would be in Virginia and we'd have another instance "mirrored" in California, which would sync any changes that we make to the primary instance.
2) Perhaps we should create a CloudFront CDN distribution instead of multiple AMIs in different regions? Or utilize both CloudFront CDN + two AMI instances set up, one for each coast?
3) [side question] Seems like we would need two separate AMI instances set up anyway to enable the load balancing feature in EC2?
First of all, think about having some kind of configuration management system available. With this you basically define a set of "roles" or "recipes" and assign your servers or instances to these roles. They will then automatically install, which makes tasks like changing the AWS region very easy. Have a look at this Wiki page for an overview.
While the latency inside the US is not that big compared to sending packages of the ocean, I would suggest to move your instance to your main traffic region, that is US east. However I do not think it is necessary in the first step to have another machine up and running in another region. I would suggest to use a service like Pingdom to measure your latency from different geographical regions. If you have the need to have another server up and running, you can still add it afterwards.
However what I would strongly suggest is using Cloudfront or another CDN. As most webpages have a lot of static files like images, css or javascript files, make sure they get delivered fast to the user. With Cloudfront you can always make sure that they will be served from the nearest endpoint. You will have a significant speedup through this.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Questions asking us to recommend or find a book, tool, software library, tutorial or other off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to monitor my large instance on amazon. CPU, disk etc.
For a better monitoring system that is free, you should check out RevealCloud (http://www.copperegg.com/cloud).
Better than CloudWatch:
free
real-time (updates in seconds, not 1 or 5 minutes)
shows more detail
alerts
easy install
single dashboard view
works on mobile devices
Amazon provides CloudWatch for this out of the box when you launch an EC2 instance. Just specify that you would like the instance monitored when starting it.
http://aws.amazon.com/cloudwatch/
There is a freely available tool called the EC2 Health Monitor.
From its official description:
ManageEngine supports the "Free EC2 Health Monitor Tool", allows you to monitor performance metrics like CPU Utilization, Network In, Network Out, Disk Read and Disk Write of AMI instances continuously. This tool presents the resource usage in an elegant graph and reports. It also shows the number of instances present and the number of instances that are in running state or stopped state in a tree view.
ManageEngine EC2 Health Monitor Tool monitors the metrics of the AMI instances. You can monitor any number of instances using this tool. The best part is that this tool is made available to you absolutely FREE of cost.
To know more about tool please visit:
http://www.manageengine.com/free-ec2-health-monitor-tool/free-ec2-health-monitor-index.html
To download the ManageEngine Free EC2 Health Monitor Tool please visit:
http://www.manageengine.com/free-ec2-health-monitor-tool/download.html
You could try Xervmon. They provide integrated cloud management with in depth monitoring on a single pane of glass.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I went to GoDaddy.com for hosting. They have menus like
1)website hosting
2)grid hosting
what is the difference between the two. I am new to this hosting and webapps stuff..
Grid hosting usually means that the web space you rent is not located on one (potentially shared) machine, but is more like a "virtual machine" (think VMware) which is hosted on a cluster of servers (a grid).
While resources on a single machine are limited and might run out, especially if it's a shared host and you have to share your resources (memory, bandwidth) with potentially hundreds or thousands of other users who are hosted on the same machine as you, grid hosting is more flexible, as your virtual website could leverage resources from more machines in the cluster if necessary. This of course also increases reliability of the website, as the failure of one grid node doesn't matter, another server takes over, while the failure of your dedicated or shared host takes your website offline.
I would assume that they refer to the single machine as "website hosting".
Update
GoDaddy has an FAQ about their grid hosting, which should answer all additional questions you might have.
A reply from Godaddy Support:
Please be advised while there is unlimited compute cycles for site server and not for database.
From wikipedia: Grid Computing | Cloud Computing. I haven't seen 'grid hosting' as a common phrase, but it could be taken to mean using one of the earlier two concepts to host a website in a scalable manner.
However, if godaddy is offering 'grid hosting' I suspect they're offering to grid computing to you in such a way that has nothing to do with hosting a website. They're offering to sell you large amounts of processor power with low communication requirements, as opposed to selling you web hosting which is typically high communication requirements with low processing requirements (relative to one another of course)
Grid computing is a collection of computing resources from multiple locations to reach in a common location. Grid is also called distributed system.it is similar to a VPS but generally has more storage then VPS Servers.
Grid Hosting is a form of distributed hosting is when a server cluster acts like a grid and is composed of multiple nodes.
Currently, various hosting service types are available..you can find details for them from here..
From above these, you can select your desired hosting provider and type.