| Simon, this is very interesting.
How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app?
Also, do you completely trust RDS to make sure your data is never lost? Is there any need for you to have a physical server replicating from RDS? Is there any risk that one day, amazon loses your database and says "Sorry, but we assume you have your own backup"?
-Kieran On Jul 27, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Simon wrote: doing what you've done means you're managing mysql, looking after it, making sure it doesn't fall over, doing backups, managing replication etc. rds does all of that for you. it also makes changing the config of your database server a breeze: need more disk space ? couple of clicks. need more ram ? couple of clicks. need more compute power behind it ? couple of clicks. need automatic fail-over to a different availability zone ? couple of clicks.
re web server resources, remember it's just a normal wo deployment running in the cloud, so you can do whatever you do now.
we don't separate the web and app tier - all our ec2 instances run monitor, wotaskd and apache, and are effectively independent of each other, and we use an elastic load balancer up front.
simon
On 27 July 2010 17:40, James Cicenia <email@hidden> wrote:
So the base image is the actual OS? So you are managing it as the admin?
I decided to try WOlastic. I configured the instances, setup up mysql with my users and sync'd the database from existing production to amazon.
So you are suggesting RDS vs. what I just did? What are the benefits of RDS? Amazon backs up the mysql I created.
Now I am a bit stumped on WebServerResources. How are you handling that?
Well, if this works well, I can my webobject apps over and then just sell my server and drop the colo.
- James On Jul 27, 2010, at 11:28 AM, Simon wrote: rolling your own is surprisingly easy if you start with a base image. we started out with a vanilla centos image from rightscale, and have built it up into what we needed from there. you can then create an ebs-backed ami in a couple of clicks.
re pricing, it all depends on what you need. our financial models tell us for our deployment is excellent value for money, and we can scale well beyond our current needs and it remains as such. use the cost aws calculator to figure out your own costs, and remember to factor in staff costs in your decision making process. those DBA's are darn expensive compared to RDS :-)
the only performance issue we found is that it is basically impossible to host your DB outside of amazon due to latency. but you don't have to use RDS - if you like sticking needles in your eyes you can just run and look after your own mysql / postgre / mssql / whatever on an ec2 instance.
the general performance of our apps has also vastly improved. a mixture of using more computing power and amazon having much faster internet transit than we were paying for in our previous co-lo.
alongside production we also run our staging servers and our hudson build server on ec2. in productivity terms running hudson there was a huge leap forward: previously a new build would take around 30 minutes to upload to staging / production. now it takes 19 seconds flat :-)
we're shortly going to move our subversion repository to ec2 as well.
Simon On 27 July 2010 15:13, James Cicenia <email@hidden> wrote:
This is very cool.
I need to move one of my servers, or, use the cloud approach for its WOApps. I see you rolled your own but wolastic seems like it is for a mere mortal.
Anyone use wolastic? What is the pricing your are seeing? Issues? Performances? Etc.
Thanks. James Cicenia
On Jul 26, 2010, at 3:55 PM, Simon wrote:
we don't use the wolastic images (we have our own) but we do deploy entirely on the amazon ec2 cloud now. ec2 instances running standard javamonitor / wotaskd, amazon RDS for database server, s3 for file storage etc. scalability on demand, load balancing, redundancy across multiple availability zones. it's the best thing since sliced bread...
our staging servers (also on ec2) run wonders javamonitor / wotasd and hence we'll probably upgrade our production servers to those soon.
simon
On 26 July 2010 21:36, Ramsey Gurley <email@hidden> wrote:
I haven't tried it yet, but WOlastic looks like a *really* cool deployment solution for WO.
http://wolastic.com/
Ramsey
On Jul 26, 2010, at 4:27 PM, Ken Anderson wrote:
Thanks for the thoughts guys! Ken On Jul 26, 2010, at 1:42 PM, Pascal Robert wrote:
Le 2010-07-26 à 12:55, Chuck Hill a écrit :
On Jul 26, 2010, at 9:44 AM, Ken Anderson wrote:
I've been asked to comment on the best way to deploy WebObjects today without any "imposed" restrictions. I haven't done any new deployments in a long while, so I'm likely not up to date on the last. What are people using today, and why do they think it's the best?
Thanks much!
Ken
Lacking imposed restrictions (e.g. must run in J2EE container), traditional WO deployment through Apache with mod_webobjects is probably the way to go. Anjo was working on mod_proxy deployment, but I don't recall how far he got or if he has this in production. It looked promising. There is also a Fast CGI adaptor and Ravi is working on something for WOWODC.
I'm adding some mods in JavaMonitor too (for WOWODC) and Andrew Lindesay also have stuff in LEWOStuff to use mod_proxy_ajp.
----
Pascal Robert
email@hidden
AIM: MacTICanada
Twitter : MacTICanada
LinkedIn : http://www.linkedin.com/in/macti
WO Community profile : http://wocommunity.org/page/member?name=probert
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ( email@hidden)
This email sent to email@hidden_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
This email sent to email@hidden _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
This email sent to email@hidden
|