News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why? by sneak on Wednesday May 06, 2020 @06:55PM (#23097391)
> We also have a number of machines with specs that would be hard to get e.g. on AWS.

What specs are those? I was under the impression AWS has everything from extremely tiny to giant terabytes-of-ram-for-SAP instance types.

Re:Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why? by centimeter on Wednesday May 06, 2020 @06:59PM (#23097417)
We would need something like an X1 instance in terms of RAM, but it's hard to find something on AWS that has a well-tuned balance of RAM/CPU/disk for our needs. A lot of the big specialized instances are tuned for one particular limiting factor (RAM/GPU/storage/CPU/bandwidth/whatever) and I don't recall them having a good selection for "really big everything".

Amazon is constantly expanding the selection, so it's possible they've added something since we last seriously looked into this.

Re:Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why? by varenc on Wednesday May 06, 2020 @07:15PM (#23097564)
Just curious, can you share general details on the types of services that need really big everything?

For most every workload I can think of, as their load increases it's always one resource in particular that's the limiting factor. (RAM/CPU/Storage/etc). So it makes sense to me that AWS instances focus on optimizing one particular resource type.

Would be interesting to hear about types of workloads that break this pattern. (Or maybe it's a few different types of workloads/services that need to be tightly integrated on one machine?)

Re:Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why? by twoodfin on Wednesday May 06, 2020 @08:27PM (#23098211)
Redlining RAM + CPU is not difficult for the right kind of database application that needs in-memory latency. RAM is a limit on your (hot, at least) data size, and CPU is a limit on your query workload.

In my experience, harder to also balance I/O so you’re close to hitting three limits, but update-heavy transactional workloads can manage it for disk-based DBMS’s.

Re:Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why? by graycat on Wednesday May 06, 2020 @09:16PM (#23098560)
> For most every workload I can think of, as their load increases it's always one resource in particular that's the limiting factor.

So this is a rediscovery, at least an example, of what could be called the bottleneck principle of system performance analysis and optimization! Sooo, just look for the bottleneck(s), work on those, and f'get about everything else until, say, everything is equally a bottleneck at which time have a well balanced, call it optimized, which can be appropriate, configuration!

At times, e.g., at IBM's Watson lab, there has been a lot of work on applying queueing theory, analysis, and simulation to analyzing and then optimizing such systems, but, more closely to fully true than one might guess, all that really mattered were the bottlenecks(s)!

Re:Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why? by hey_ross on Monday May 11, 2020 @01:48PM (#23144868)
We just launched (Oracle Cloud) an AMD Epyc 2 Compute service (called E3 on our compute page) that is the beginning of 'shapeless' or flexible computing - you can spec the cores for your shape from 1-64 and drive the balance on storage and memory. That might be a fit for you, as it's really inexpensive or the power.
Re:Ask HN: Is your company sticking to on-premise servers? Why? by frakkingcylons on Wednesday May 06, 2020 @07:36PM (#23097774)
It could be that they need hardware that can support less common architectures, like Solaris or AIX.