Why We Moved Off The Cloud

Re:Why We Moved Off The Cloud by benologist on Thursday October 27, 2011 @04:25PM (#3165347)

Yeah bandwidth can be insanely expensive on the cloud. Amazon at least can mitigate that if you're exclusively on their network so it's all incoming + across-their-network but as soon as you start kicking terabytes off their network you're going to feel it.

Dedicateds with massive bandwidth plans are very easy to come by, on top of the perks of dedicated io and raid (which also starts very cheap).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why We Moved Off The Cloud by herbivore on Thursday October 27, 2011 @08:49PM (#3166386)

With many (if not most) reputable dedicated server providers nowadays Inbound traffic is not calculated towards your overall traffic. In other words, it's free and generally unlimited.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why We Moved Off The Cloud by asharp on Friday October 28, 2011 @06:44AM (#3167727)

Remember that most loads are 1:10 inbound:outbound, so unless you have a strange sort of workload it really doesn't help you much.

If you do happen to have a lot of inbound traffic though, it's a nice little arrangement as the bandwidth may be almost free to the provider (Symetricity requirements) and still very useful to you.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why We Moved Off The Cloud by benologist on Thursday October 27, 2011 @09:42PM (#3166575)

I did not know that. My provider counts inbound which sucks because that's most of our traffic but we run at about 6 out of 10 terabytes per server per month so it's not a problem... for now.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why We Moved Off The Cloud by dhimes on Friday October 28, 2011 @12:40PM (#3168972)

It double-sucks because it's not easy (AFAIK) to gzip traffic from web app to the server.

[ Parent | on HN ]