On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Norbert Melzer wrote:
Sorry, wasn't meant to be imperative, there is missing a simple "I", I can't
now about the prices in the whole world but in Germany. So I wrote that this
applies to Germany. I still hoped that there are similar offers all over the
world, because I often realized that in hosting not really the amount to pay
differs, but the actual performance of the hosting service.
VPS.Net offers servers for around $20 a month starting, they are all
over the world (so it's somewhat good for the price they offer but I
can't comment on them for personal reasons). Amazon's cheapest server
runs about $15 a month (though they are in selective markets outside
of the US, Western Europe and Asia, in mid-Europe they are pretty
spread out leaving much to be desired for fast connections.)

Heroku's problem is not price, it's a good price for the
infrastructure you get (to a certain extent until the math breaks your
wallet) the problem is the infrastructure itself, and not directly
related to the infrastructure but to the location of it, it's a single
location in a single point and I don't know if they ever plan to
branch out into other markets making their service even more price
worthy. It's easy to scale out, it's hard to scale out across the
world unless you get all pro like Cloudflare did and trick out the
deployment methods you use but not many people think like they do when
it comes to scaling.

Lots of hosting providers start at or around $15-$20. I would look
more at their infrastructure and the problems they have with it before
I look at the price. For example with Heroku the problem comes down
to a single location, eventually you'll want your own infrastructure,
probably long before you care about the price. In the past certain
other providers had huge problems with their storage. With
Mediatemple you'll eventually get pissed off at the root access but
lack of access to the Kernel (unless they changed that since I was
there testing.) At Amazon you'll probably think you're okay until you
realize there are better ways if you can get it right (but again that
is hard to do so for most it's just not worth the initial cost to do
it right since there could be a huge margin of error depending on your
team.)

At other hosting providers you might do great for a while then when
you end up having an IO heavy site, you get tore down and end up
killing the entire hypervisor so you get killed by them so you move to
Amazon and then get hit with huge IO costs (because IO costs there,
and it can cost a lot depending on what type of IO you want and how
much of it you want to secure) so then you end up thinking about
scaling into your own hardware but again that's hard to do right if
you want to spread out and not remain in a single location which
brings you back to a Heroku like situation.

So for me it always comes down to how much IO costs, how much can I
secure and how much is that premium IO going to cost me and whether or
not the company that is going to be hosting me or my clients can
handle that IO or if they are used to tailoring to sites that think
they need a VPS but really don't or just have it for security reasons
but don't really need the full power.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Previous

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 6 of 7 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouprubyonrails-talk @
categoriesrubyonrails
postedNov 26, '12 at 1:36a
activeNov 26, '12 at 10:07p
posts7
users4
websiterubyonrails.org
irc#RubyOnRails

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase