Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
Hi Simon, On 28/07/2010, at 1:58 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. To get specific, was it one of these you started from? http://support.rightscale.com/18-Release_Notes/02-AMI/RightImages_Release_Notes I'm looking at the CentOS 5.4 (v4.4.10) AMI, as I'm already deploying on CentOS. -- Paul. http://logicsquad.net/ ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
yeah, that looks about right. keep in mind my earlier comments about the full cost of a production environment: you got to factor in salaries to see the true value at a low-medium scale production environment. we think at larger scale the cost benefits are even easier to see, but YMMV. unfortunately i'm not going to be at WOWODC - whilst you are all lecturing out, i'll be surfing on the (hopefully) sunny cornwall coastline with my little nippers. however, a couple of our dev's are coming out to canada. they aren't too involved with the aws stuff, but might be able to answer some q's. i'm more than happy to keep answering q's on this list, and sharing stuff we've figured.. simon On 4 August 2010 21:43, Kieran Kelleher kieran_li...@mac.com wrote: So the AWS calculator indicates about $2200 a month for one Large Multi-AZ 100% RDS and 3 Extra Large 100% EC2 instances. Does that sound about right or would you expect it to be much less than that? Or, if you prefer you can enlighten me more over a beer at WOWODC - are you going to the upcoming WOWODC? Regards, Kieran On Aug 4, 2010, at 7:18 AM, Simon wrote: yes, we run our production servers 24/7. at the moment we run our staging and build servers 24/7 as well, but we are going to stop that shortly by writing a quartz job based on the ec2 api to boot and shutdown non-production instances automatically so they run 8am-8pm instead of 24/7 simon On 4 August 2010 10:12, Marius Soutier m.sout...@starhealthcare.infowrote: So are you using your EC2 instances 24/7? Do you use on-demand instances or reserved ones? EC2 seems ridiculously cheap as long as you start instances only when you need them, but for permanent usage I'm not sure yet. - Marius On 03.08.2010, at 14:28, Simon wrote: we run a db.m1.large instance and our db is around 20GB. previously it ran on an intel xserve with 8GB of Ram. performance wise db.m1.large is around where we were before, but we've not been scientific about this because we didn't have any performance issues before, and we don't have any now. we didn't move to RDS for performance. however, when staging the move we initially ran a db.m1.small instance and that was nowhere near powerful enough. when we boot copies of production for testing purposes we use db.m1.small, but we wouldn't use that in production. the real beauty of RDS with regard to performance is that is its literally a couple of clicks to upgrade. how long do you think it will take you to transition your DB to that a linux raid server ? we could double our compute power and ram in literally 3 clicks and a couple of minutes - and because we run with multi-avail zone it would automatically fail over to the slave whilst the upgrade took place. we don't use ssl. traffic is limited to our ec instances, and yes sensitive data is encrypted in the db anyway. we've just flown through PCIDSS compliance without a glitch. regarding multi-avail: my understanding is that they have made limited modifications to the 5.1 code base to support running mysql on a big scale in the cloud. i don't know if that includes fundamental changes to the master/slave mechanics, but the way multi-avail works feels like it's just plain old replication, but wrapped in some fancy automation. yeah, the docs do mention latency, but we've not noticed anything at all. the biggest mistake we made was attempting to run apps outside ec2 pointing at RDS. the latency in that set-up killed our apps. ymmv. simon On 2 August 2010 21:02, Kieran Kelleher kieran_li...@mac.com wrote: Sounds great Simon. I have a database of about 35GB of data running on an 8GB PowerPC G5 today in one of my active projects and we have preliminary plans under way to upgrade our DB server to a 32GB Linux RAID unit. What is the biggest RDS memory size instance that you have used, and what is the perception of performance gains, if any, over traditional self or colo hosting? I notice they support SSL connections also to MySQL. Do you use SSL between the EC2 app instance and the RDS instance - or is that overkill considering that I have sensitive data (credit card numbers, etc) encrypted in the database fields anyway? If you do use SSL connections between app and db, have you noticed much latency? You said you have availed of the different zone replication/failover feature - from reading the FAQs, it appears that this is different to traditional master-slave replication - are they executing the SQL in parallel on both the master and failover RDS instances to give true mirroring, or am I reading this wrong? Have you noticed latency impact due to this configuration (the online info suggests that there is some latency)? Regards, Kieran On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Simon wrote: How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
So are you using your EC2 instances 24/7? Do you use on-demand instances or reserved ones? EC2 seems ridiculously cheap as long as you start instances only when you need them, but for permanent usage I'm not sure yet. - Marius On 03.08.2010, at 14:28, Simon wrote: we run a db.m1.large instance and our db is around 20GB. previously it ran on an intel xserve with 8GB of Ram. performance wise db.m1.large is around where we were before, but we've not been scientific about this because we didn't have any performance issues before, and we don't have any now. we didn't move to RDS for performance. however, when staging the move we initially ran a db.m1.small instance and that was nowhere near powerful enough. when we boot copies of production for testing purposes we use db.m1.small, but we wouldn't use that in production. the real beauty of RDS with regard to performance is that is its literally a couple of clicks to upgrade. how long do you think it will take you to transition your DB to that a linux raid server ? we could double our compute power and ram in literally 3 clicks and a couple of minutes - and because we run with multi-avail zone it would automatically fail over to the slave whilst the upgrade took place. we don't use ssl. traffic is limited to our ec instances, and yes sensitive data is encrypted in the db anyway. we've just flown through PCIDSS compliance without a glitch. regarding multi-avail: my understanding is that they have made limited modifications to the 5.1 code base to support running mysql on a big scale in the cloud. i don't know if that includes fundamental changes to the master/slave mechanics, but the way multi-avail works feels like it's just plain old replication, but wrapped in some fancy automation. yeah, the docs do mention latency, but we've not noticed anything at all. the biggest mistake we made was attempting to run apps outside ec2 pointing at RDS. the latency in that set-up killed our apps. ymmv. simon On 2 August 2010 21:02, Kieran Kelleher kieran_li...@mac.com wrote: Sounds great Simon. I have a database of about 35GB of data running on an 8GB PowerPC G5 today in one of my active projects and we have preliminary plans under way to upgrade our DB server to a 32GB Linux RAID unit. What is the biggest RDS memory size instance that you have used, and what is the perception of performance gains, if any, over traditional self or colo hosting? I notice they support SSL connections also to MySQL. Do you use SSL between the EC2 app instance and the RDS instance - or is that overkill considering that I have sensitive data (credit card numbers, etc) encrypted in the database fields anyway? If you do use SSL connections between app and db, have you noticed much latency? You said you have availed of the different zone replication/failover feature - from reading the FAQs, it appears that this is different to traditional master-slave replication - are they executing the SQL in parallel on both the master and failover RDS instances to give true mirroring, or am I reading this wrong? Have you noticed latency impact due to this configuration (the online info suggests that there is some latency)? Regards, Kieran On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Simon wrote: How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon provide a couple of cookie-based mechanisms for session stickiness. if you are using https then you can use the elb to send initial requests to one of your instances, then the user communicates with that specific instance directly. there is no ssl-termination available with elb, but the amazon lists suggest this is coming. once they have this ssl load balancing will be a lot more elegant. 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? in short, yes, i completely trust it. we've been running it in production for 9 months now without a single glitch. we use their multi-avail support and we've done test failovers which happen flawlessly in minutes. how long would it take you to (a) make a decision to fail over your master to a slave and (b) physically carry out the failover and (c) physically restore the master once things are sorted out ? the automation here alone makes it a much more powerful solution than running it ourselves. and how often do you test restoring from your backups ? officially we used to do it once a month, but it was always a real drag... now we routinely restore databases - sometimes several times a day - and use them to test code against because it's 2 clicks, make a
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
yes, we run our production servers 24/7. at the moment we run our staging and build servers 24/7 as well, but we are going to stop that shortly by writing a quartz job based on the ec2 api to boot and shutdown non-production instances automatically so they run 8am-8pm instead of 24/7 simon On 4 August 2010 10:12, Marius Soutier m.sout...@starhealthcare.infowrote: So are you using your EC2 instances 24/7? Do you use on-demand instances or reserved ones? EC2 seems ridiculously cheap as long as you start instances only when you need them, but for permanent usage I'm not sure yet. - Marius On 03.08.2010, at 14:28, Simon wrote: we run a db.m1.large instance and our db is around 20GB. previously it ran on an intel xserve with 8GB of Ram. performance wise db.m1.large is around where we were before, but we've not been scientific about this because we didn't have any performance issues before, and we don't have any now. we didn't move to RDS for performance. however, when staging the move we initially ran a db.m1.small instance and that was nowhere near powerful enough. when we boot copies of production for testing purposes we use db.m1.small, but we wouldn't use that in production. the real beauty of RDS with regard to performance is that is its literally a couple of clicks to upgrade. how long do you think it will take you to transition your DB to that a linux raid server ? we could double our compute power and ram in literally 3 clicks and a couple of minutes - and because we run with multi-avail zone it would automatically fail over to the slave whilst the upgrade took place. we don't use ssl. traffic is limited to our ec instances, and yes sensitive data is encrypted in the db anyway. we've just flown through PCIDSS compliance without a glitch. regarding multi-avail: my understanding is that they have made limited modifications to the 5.1 code base to support running mysql on a big scale in the cloud. i don't know if that includes fundamental changes to the master/slave mechanics, but the way multi-avail works feels like it's just plain old replication, but wrapped in some fancy automation. yeah, the docs do mention latency, but we've not noticed anything at all. the biggest mistake we made was attempting to run apps outside ec2 pointing at RDS. the latency in that set-up killed our apps. ymmv. simon On 2 August 2010 21:02, Kieran Kelleher kieran_li...@mac.com wrote: Sounds great Simon. I have a database of about 35GB of data running on an 8GB PowerPC G5 today in one of my active projects and we have preliminary plans under way to upgrade our DB server to a 32GB Linux RAID unit. What is the biggest RDS memory size instance that you have used, and what is the perception of performance gains, if any, over traditional self or colo hosting? I notice they support SSL connections also to MySQL. Do you use SSL between the EC2 app instance and the RDS instance - or is that overkill considering that I have sensitive data (credit card numbers, etc) encrypted in the database fields anyway? If you do use SSL connections between app and db, have you noticed much latency? You said you have availed of the different zone replication/failover feature - from reading the FAQs, it appears that this is different to traditional master-slave replication - are they executing the SQL in parallel on both the master and failover RDS instances to give true mirroring, or am I reading this wrong? Have you noticed latency impact due to this configuration (the online info suggests that there is some latency)? Regards, Kieran On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Simon wrote: How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon provide a couple of cookie-based mechanisms for session stickiness. if you are using https then you can use the elb to send initial requests to one of your instances, then the user communicates with that specific instance directly. there is no ssl-termination available with elb, but the amazon lists suggest this is coming. once they have this ssl load balancing will be a lot more elegant. 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? in short, yes, i completely trust it. we've been running it in production for 9 months now without a single glitch. we use their multi-avail support and we've done test failovers which happen flawlessly in minutes. how long would it take you to (a) make a decision to fail over your master to a slave and (b) physically carry out the failover and (c) physically restore the master once things are sorted out ? the automation here alone makes it a much more powerful
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
So the AWS calculator indicates about $2200 a month for one Large Multi-AZ 100% RDS and 3 Extra Large 100% EC2 instances. Does that sound about right or would you expect it to be much less than that? Or, if you prefer you can enlighten me more over a beer at WOWODC - are you going to the upcoming WOWODC? Regards, Kieran On Aug 4, 2010, at 7:18 AM, Simon wrote: yes, we run our production servers 24/7. at the moment we run our staging and build servers 24/7 as well, but we are going to stop that shortly by writing a quartz job based on the ec2 api to boot and shutdown non-production instances automatically so they run 8am-8pm instead of 24/7 simon On 4 August 2010 10:12, Marius Soutier m.sout...@starhealthcare.info wrote: So are you using your EC2 instances 24/7? Do you use on-demand instances or reserved ones? EC2 seems ridiculously cheap as long as you start instances only when you need them, but for permanent usage I'm not sure yet. - Marius On 03.08.2010, at 14:28, Simon wrote: we run a db.m1.large instance and our db is around 20GB. previously it ran on an intel xserve with 8GB of Ram. performance wise db.m1.large is around where we were before, but we've not been scientific about this because we didn't have any performance issues before, and we don't have any now. we didn't move to RDS for performance. however, when staging the move we initially ran a db.m1.small instance and that was nowhere near powerful enough. when we boot copies of production for testing purposes we use db.m1.small, but we wouldn't use that in production. the real beauty of RDS with regard to performance is that is its literally a couple of clicks to upgrade. how long do you think it will take you to transition your DB to that a linux raid server ? we could double our compute power and ram in literally 3 clicks and a couple of minutes - and because we run with multi-avail zone it would automatically fail over to the slave whilst the upgrade took place. we don't use ssl. traffic is limited to our ec instances, and yes sensitive data is encrypted in the db anyway. we've just flown through PCIDSS compliance without a glitch. regarding multi-avail: my understanding is that they have made limited modifications to the 5.1 code base to support running mysql on a big scale in the cloud. i don't know if that includes fundamental changes to the master/slave mechanics, but the way multi-avail works feels like it's just plain old replication, but wrapped in some fancy automation. yeah, the docs do mention latency, but we've not noticed anything at all. the biggest mistake we made was attempting to run apps outside ec2 pointing at RDS. the latency in that set-up killed our apps. ymmv. simon On 2 August 2010 21:02, Kieran Kelleher kieran_li...@mac.com wrote: Sounds great Simon. I have a database of about 35GB of data running on an 8GB PowerPC G5 today in one of my active projects and we have preliminary plans under way to upgrade our DB server to a 32GB Linux RAID unit. What is the biggest RDS memory size instance that you have used, and what is the perception of performance gains, if any, over traditional self or colo hosting? I notice they support SSL connections also to MySQL. Do you use SSL between the EC2 app instance and the RDS instance - or is that overkill considering that I have sensitive data (credit card numbers, etc) encrypted in the database fields anyway? If you do use SSL connections between app and db, have you noticed much latency? You said you have availed of the different zone replication/failover feature - from reading the FAQs, it appears that this is different to traditional master-slave replication - are they executing the SQL in parallel on both the master and failover RDS instances to give true mirroring, or am I reading this wrong? Have you noticed latency impact due to this configuration (the online info suggests that there is some latency)? Regards, Kieran On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Simon wrote: How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon provide a couple of cookie-based mechanisms for session stickiness. if you are using https then you can use the elb to send initial requests to one of your instances, then the user communicates with that specific instance directly. there is no ssl-termination available with elb, but the amazon lists suggest this is coming. once they have this ssl load balancing will be a lot more elegant. 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? in short, yes, i completely
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
I'll be there!! I've built an image at Rackspace - using FathomDB as the mysql service. Working good so far, but this is just preliminary right now. Ken On Aug 4, 2010, at 4:43 PM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: So the AWS calculator indicates about $2200 a month for one Large Multi-AZ 100% RDS and 3 Extra Large 100% EC2 instances. Does that sound about right or would you expect it to be much less than that? Or, if you prefer you can enlighten me more over a beer at WOWODC - are you going to the upcoming WOWODC? Regards, Kieran On Aug 4, 2010, at 7:18 AM, Simon wrote: yes, we run our production servers 24/7. at the moment we run our staging and build servers 24/7 as well, but we are going to stop that shortly by writing a quartz job based on the ec2 api to boot and shutdown non-production instances automatically so they run 8am-8pm instead of 24/7 simon On 4 August 2010 10:12, Marius Soutier m.sout...@starhealthcare.info wrote: So are you using your EC2 instances 24/7? Do you use on-demand instances or reserved ones? EC2 seems ridiculously cheap as long as you start instances only when you need them, but for permanent usage I'm not sure yet. - Marius On 03.08.2010, at 14:28, Simon wrote: we run a db.m1.large instance and our db is around 20GB. previously it ran on an intel xserve with 8GB of Ram. performance wise db.m1.large is around where we were before, but we've not been scientific about this because we didn't have any performance issues before, and we don't have any now. we didn't move to RDS for performance. however, when staging the move we initially ran a db.m1.small instance and that was nowhere near powerful enough. when we boot copies of production for testing purposes we use db.m1.small, but we wouldn't use that in production. the real beauty of RDS with regard to performance is that is its literally a couple of clicks to upgrade. how long do you think it will take you to transition your DB to that a linux raid server ? we could double our compute power and ram in literally 3 clicks and a couple of minutes - and because we run with multi-avail zone it would automatically fail over to the slave whilst the upgrade took place. we don't use ssl. traffic is limited to our ec instances, and yes sensitive data is encrypted in the db anyway. we've just flown through PCIDSS compliance without a glitch. regarding multi-avail: my understanding is that they have made limited modifications to the 5.1 code base to support running mysql on a big scale in the cloud. i don't know if that includes fundamental changes to the master/slave mechanics, but the way multi-avail works feels like it's just plain old replication, but wrapped in some fancy automation. yeah, the docs do mention latency, but we've not noticed anything at all. the biggest mistake we made was attempting to run apps outside ec2 pointing at RDS. the latency in that set-up killed our apps. ymmv. simon On 2 August 2010 21:02, Kieran Kelleher kieran_li...@mac.com wrote: Sounds great Simon. I have a database of about 35GB of data running on an 8GB PowerPC G5 today in one of my active projects and we have preliminary plans under way to upgrade our DB server to a 32GB Linux RAID unit. What is the biggest RDS memory size instance that you have used, and what is the perception of performance gains, if any, over traditional self or colo hosting? I notice they support SSL connections also to MySQL. Do you use SSL between the EC2 app instance and the RDS instance - or is that overkill considering that I have sensitive data (credit card numbers, etc) encrypted in the database fields anyway? If you do use SSL connections between app and db, have you noticed much latency? You said you have availed of the different zone replication/failover feature - from reading the FAQs, it appears that this is different to traditional master-slave replication - are they executing the SQL in parallel on both the master and failover RDS instances to give true mirroring, or am I reading this wrong? Have you noticed latency impact due to this configuration (the online info suggests that there is some latency)? Regards, Kieran On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Simon wrote: How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon provide a couple of cookie-based mechanisms for session stickiness. if you are using https then you can use the elb to send initial requests to one of your instances, then the user communicates with that specific instance directly. there is no ssl-termination available with elb, but the amazon lists suggest this is coming. once they have this ssl load balancing will be a lot more elegant. Also, do you completely trust RDS to make sure your data is never lost? Is
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
we run a db.m1.large instance and our db is around 20GB. previously it ran on an intel xserve with 8GB of Ram. performance wise db.m1.large is around where we were before, but we've not been scientific about this because we didn't have any performance issues before, and we don't have any now. we didn't move to RDS for performance. however, when staging the move we initially ran a db.m1.small instance and that was nowhere near powerful enough. when we boot copies of production for testing purposes we use db.m1.small, but we wouldn't use that in production. the real beauty of RDS with regard to performance is that is its literally a couple of clicks to upgrade. how long do you think it will take you to transition your DB to that a linux raid server ? we could double our compute power and ram in literally 3 clicks and a couple of minutes - and because we run with multi-avail zone it would automatically fail over to the slave whilst the upgrade took place. we don't use ssl. traffic is limited to our ec instances, and yes sensitive data is encrypted in the db anyway. we've just flown through PCIDSS compliance without a glitch. regarding multi-avail: my understanding is that they have made limited modifications to the 5.1 code base to support running mysql on a big scale in the cloud. i don't know if that includes fundamental changes to the master/slave mechanics, but the way multi-avail works feels like it's just plain old replication, but wrapped in some fancy automation. yeah, the docs do mention latency, but we've not noticed anything at all. the biggest mistake we made was attempting to run apps outside ec2 pointing at RDS. the latency in that set-up killed our apps. ymmv. simon On 2 August 2010 21:02, Kieran Kelleher kieran_li...@mac.com wrote: Sounds great Simon. I have a database of about 35GB of data running on an 8GB PowerPC G5 today in one of my active projects and we have preliminary plans under way to upgrade our DB server to a 32GB Linux RAID unit. What is the biggest RDS memory size instance that you have used, and what is the perception of performance gains, if any, over traditional self or colo hosting? I notice they support SSL connections also to MySQL. Do you use SSL between the EC2 app instance and the RDS instance - or is that overkill considering that I have sensitive data (credit card numbers, etc) encrypted in the database fields anyway? If you do use SSL connections between app and db, have you noticed much latency? You said you have availed of the different zone replication/failover feature - from reading the FAQs, it appears that this is different to traditional master-slave replication - are they executing the SQL in parallel on both the master and failover RDS instances to give true mirroring, or am I reading this wrong? Have you noticed latency impact due to this configuration (the online info suggests that there is some latency)? Regards, Kieran On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Simon wrote: How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon provide a couple of cookie-based mechanisms for session stickiness. if you are using https then you can use the elb to send initial requests to one of your instances, then the user communicates with that specific instance directly. there is no ssl-termination available with elb, but the amazon lists suggest this is coming. once they have this ssl load balancing will be a lot more elegant. 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? in short, yes, i completely trust it. we've been running it in production for 9 months now without a single glitch. we use their multi-avail support and we've done test failovers which happen flawlessly in minutes. how long would it take you to (a) make a decision to fail over your master to a slave and (b) physically carry out the failover and (c) physically restore the master once things are sorted out ? the automation here alone makes it a much more powerful solution than running it ourselves. and how often do you test restoring from your backups ? officially we used to do it once a month, but it was always a real drag... now we routinely restore databases - sometimes several times a day - and use them to test code against because it's 2 clicks, make a cup of tea, and you've got a fully functioning snapshot of production from 5 minutes ago. do we ever take normal backups ? yes, but very very rarely, and not for date protection - we do them purely to get a fresher copy on our laptops for offline use. Simon -Kieran On Jul 27, 2010, at 1:16 PM, Simon wrote: doing what you've done means you're
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
OK - I am not a server administrator but delved into RightScale, Amazon and RDS this weekend. I decided to not use WOLastic as it doesn't seem to in active development. However, that made me think about seeing if we could get some script donations added to Wonder. As an example. How about a set of RightScale scripts (which are just UNIX scripts really) to configure a WebObjects server with the latest Wonder/WO Frameworks. This could/should include JAVA, Apache and WOJavaMonitor and whatever else Simon learned. I know I could use those scripts as IANAUA (I am not an Unix admin). Regards James On Aug 2, 2010, at 7:14 AM, Kieran Kelleher wrote: 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon provide a couple of cookie-based mechanisms for session stickiness. if you are using https then you can use the elb to send initial requests to one of your instances, then the user communicates with that specific instance directly. there is no ssl-termination available with elb, but the amazon lists suggest this is coming. once they have this ssl load balancing will be a lot more elegant. 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? in short, yes, i completely trust it. we've been running it in production for 9 months now without a single glitch. we use their multi-avail support and we've done test failovers which happen flawlessly in minutes. how long would it take you to (a) make a decision to fail over your master to a slave and (b) physically carry out the failover and (c) physically restore the master once things are sorted out ? the automation here alone makes it a much more powerful solution than running it ourselves. and how often do you test restoring from your backups ? officially we used to do it once a month, but it was always a real drag... now we routinely restore databases - sometimes several times a day - and use them to test code against because it's 2 clicks, make a cup of tea, and you've got a fully functioning snapshot of production from 5 minutes ago. do we ever take normal backups ? yes, but very very rarely, and not for date protection - we do them purely to get a fresher copy on our laptops for offline use. Simon -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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com wrote: This is very cool. I need to move
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
Hopefully I will have something running in the next few days Otherwise I will be cursing Simon on this list. my youngest son could get WO running on amazon. and he's 12 weeks old :-) Simon ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
amazon has security groups which are like a really basic firewall. ie. open this port for traffic from this cidr range. and you can create as many security groups as you like, which is sometimes quite handy. you can do some quite advanced stuff too from the cli... simon On 31 July 2010 04:14, Chuck Hill ch...@global-village.net wrote: I honestly have no idea. That is an interesting question. Chuck On Jul 30, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm just not sure what kind of control you have over the firewall with these cloud servers... On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? That depends on the size of the installation. Usually Apache and some of the instances can co-exist. You can run Apache on each machine and put a load balancer in front. For lower usage apps, you can put the database on the same machine. Put them all behind a firewall and only allow 80 and 443 through. Chuck I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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.
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
Sounds great Simon. I have a database of about 35GB of data running on an 8GB PowerPC G5 today in one of my active projects and we have preliminary plans under way to upgrade our DB server to a 32GB Linux RAID unit. What is the biggest RDS memory size instance that you have used, and what is the perception of performance gains, if any, over traditional self or colo hosting? I notice they support SSL connections also to MySQL. Do you use SSL between the EC2 app instance and the RDS instance - or is that overkill considering that I have sensitive data (credit card numbers, etc) encrypted in the database fields anyway? If you do use SSL connections between app and db, have you noticed much latency? You said you have availed of the different zone replication/failover feature - from reading the FAQs, it appears that this is different to traditional master-slave replication - are they executing the SQL in parallel on both the master and failover RDS instances to give true mirroring, or am I reading this wrong? Have you noticed latency impact due to this configuration (the online info suggests that there is some latency)? Regards, Kieran On Aug 2, 2010, at 1:38 PM, Simon wrote: How does session management work with the elastic load balancer? For example if you have 3 independent EC2 instances all running the same app? if you are not using https then amazon provide a couple of cookie-based mechanisms for session stickiness. if you are using https then you can use the elb to send initial requests to one of your instances, then the user communicates with that specific instance directly. there is no ssl-termination available with elb, but the amazon lists suggest this is coming. once they have this ssl load balancing will be a lot more elegant. 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? in short, yes, i completely trust it. we've been running it in production for 9 months now without a single glitch. we use their multi-avail support and we've done test failovers which happen flawlessly in minutes. how long would it take you to (a) make a decision to fail over your master to a slave and (b) physically carry out the failover and (c) physically restore the master once things are sorted out ? the automation here alone makes it a much more powerful solution than running it ourselves. and how often do you test restoring from your backups ? officially we used to do it once a month, but it was always a real drag... now we routinely restore databases - sometimes several times a day - and use them to test code against because it's 2 clicks, make a cup of tea, and you've got a fully functioning snapshot of production from 5 minutes ago. do we ever take normal backups ? yes, but very very rarely, and not for date protection - we do them purely to get a fresher copy on our laptops for offline use. Simon -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 ja...@jimijon.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
OK - at least at Rackspace, there's a tool called iptables that allows you to set firewall rules. On Jul 30, 2010, at 11:14 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: I honestly have no idea. That is an interesting question. Chuck On Jul 30, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm just not sure what kind of control you have over the firewall with these cloud servers... On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? That depends on the size of the installation. Usually Apache and some of the instances can co-exist. You can run Apache on each machine and put a load balancer in front. For lower usage apps, you can put the database on the same machine. Put them all behind a firewall and only allow 80 and 443 through. Chuck I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
Ken I host at SliceHost (subsidiary of Rackspace). The VM's that I get both Ubuntu and CentOS both are full OS's and they also have iptables. Paul On Jul 31, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Ken Anderson wrote: OK - at least at Rackspace, there's a tool called iptables that allows you to set firewall rules. On Jul 30, 2010, at 11:14 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: I honestly have no idea. That is an interesting question. Chuck On Jul 30, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm just not sure what kind of control you have over the firewall with these cloud servers... On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? That depends on the size of the installation. Usually Apache and some of the instances can co-exist. You can run Apache on each machine and put a load balancer in front. For lower usage apps, you can put the database on the same machine. Put them all behind a firewall and only allow 80 and 443 through. Chuck I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
One of the managed/dedicated rackspace server has had the basic default setup. However, it is just running apache/wo/mysql on the one box with few ports open. This is not a multi-tiered approach but it has worked great for years now. I am currently wrangling with learning the whole rightscale/amazon ec2/rds/s3 approach. Hopefully I will have something running in the next few days Otherwise I will be cursing Simon on this list. ;-) On Jul 31, 2010, at 8:14 AM, Ken Anderson wrote: OK - at least at Rackspace, there's a tool called iptables that allows you to set firewall rules. On Jul 30, 2010, at 11:14 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: I honestly have no idea. That is an interesting question. Chuck On Jul 30, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm just not sure what kind of control you have over the firewall with these cloud servers... On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? That depends on the size of the installation. Usually Apache and some of the instances can co-exist. You can run Apache on each machine and put a load balancer in front. For lower usage apps, you can put the database on the same machine. Put them all behind a firewall and only allow 80 and 443 through. Chuck I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? That depends on the size of the installation. Usually Apache and some of the instances can co-exist. You can run Apache on each machine and put a load balancer in front. For lower usage apps, you can put the database on the same machine. Put them all behind a firewall and only allow 80 and 443 through. Chuck I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
I'm just not sure what kind of control you have over the firewall with these cloud servers... On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? That depends on the size of the installation. Usually Apache and some of the instances can co-exist. You can run Apache on each machine and put a load balancer in front. For lower usage apps, you can put the database on the same machine. Put them all behind a firewall and only allow 80 and 443 through. Chuck I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com wrote: This is very cool. I need to
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
I honestly have no idea. That is an interesting question. Chuck On Jul 30, 2010, at 6:55 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm just not sure what kind of control you have over the firewall with these cloud servers... On Jul 30, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Chuck Hill wrote: On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: Does everyone run apache and WO on the same machine? No DMZ? That depends on the size of the installation. Usually Apache and some of the instances can co-exist. You can run Apache on each machine and put a load balancer in front. For lower usage apps, you can put the database on the same machine. Put them all behind a firewall and only allow 80 and 443 through. Chuck I'm still not clear on how these cloud servers are supposed to work regarding separation... Ken On Jul 29, 2010, at 1:35 AM, Lon Varscsak wrote: I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
+1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com 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.
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com wrote: I haven't tried it yet, but WOlastic looks like a *really* cool
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
I have a dedicated box on rackspace too...it's pricey, but solid as a rock. WO/apache/Postgres. -Lon On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 6:24 PM, James Cicenia ja...@jimijon.com wrote: I actually have a dedicated managed box over at Rackspace. Their support is top notch. And the webobjects app just keep chugging. I use mysql. - James On Jul 28, 2010, at 3:49 PM, Ken Anderson wrote: I'm considering using rackspace and fathomdb - seems very similar to ec2 and rds. Anyone have any experience with rackspace? I've been using the for mail hosting for a while and I like them. Ken On Jul 28, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Giles Palmer wrote: +1 for a podcast! We are just starting down the EC2 route and would be very interested in your experiences. We are using postgres so can't make use of RDS which is a great shame, we are also intending to make use of hBase (Hadoop) for some of our file storage. Giles You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 ram...@xeotech.com 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 prob...@macti.ca 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 (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/ramsey%40xeotech.com This email sent to ram...@xeotech.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/simon%40potwells.co.uk This email sent to si...@potwells.co.uk ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/james%40jimijon.com This email sent to ja...@jimijon.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com 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 prob...@macti.ca 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 (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/ramsey%40xeotech.com This email sent to ram...@xeotech.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/simon%40potwells.co.uk This email sent to si...@potwells.co.uk ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/james%40jimijon.com This email sent to ja...@jimijon.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com 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 prob...@macti.ca 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 (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/ramsey%40xeotech.com This email sent to ram...@xeotech.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com 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
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
You know, that could make a great podcast or even better, a nice WOWODC presentation :-) Ubermind did a great introduction to WOlastic last year, your case study can complement it. 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 :-) http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html 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 ja...@jimijon.com 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 ram...@xeotech.com 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.
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
We use out of the box womonitor on linux or OSX and embed all the frameworks. - James On Jul 26, 2010, at 11:44 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 ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/james%40jimijon.com This email sent to ja...@jimijon.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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. Chuck -- Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their overall knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific problems. http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 prob...@macti.ca 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 (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 prob...@macti.ca 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 (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 prob...@macti.ca 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 (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/ramsey%40xeotech.com This email sent to ram...@xeotech.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
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 ram...@xeotech.com 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 prob...@macti.ca 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 (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/ramsey%40xeotech.com This email sent to ram...@xeotech.com ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/simon%40potwells.co.uk This email sent to si...@potwells.co.uk ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
Hi Simon; ...amazon RDS for database server.. I see that's using MySQL –– does it somehow handle deferred referential integrity checking? cheers. ___ Andrew Lindesay www.silvereye.co.nz ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
RDS is more or less mysql 5.1, with a few goodies wrapped around it. they haven't (as far as i know) added any bells or whistles to the core database server - they've just automated the management of it. my favourite goodies are point in time recovery and multi-availability zone with auto fail over. point in time recover is enabled by amazon taking snapshots of your database every 5 minutes or so. what's brilliant is that in just a few minutes you can boot one of these snapshots up as a completely functioning database server. so, for example, i was busy debugging something in our production environment earlier today so i just booted up a snapshot taken 5 minutes before and tested code against it. after i was done i terminated the instance and hence stopped paying for it. ok it cost a couple of dollars, but the sheer productivity gain is worth every penny. multi avail fail over is equally brilliant. switch it on and amazon maintain a fully functioning exact replica of your master database in a different availability zone, and have a mechanism to auto-failver if the master has any issues. it's basically mysql replication (master-slave) across 2 separate availability zones (ie. data centre) but fully automated. simon On 26 July 2010 22:00, Andrew Lindesay a...@lindesay.co.nz wrote: Hi Simon; ...amazon RDS for database server.. I see that's using MySQL –– does it somehow handle deferred referential integrity checking? cheers. ___ Andrew Lindesay www.silvereye.co.nz ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
Re: Suggestions for best deployment?
On Jul 26, 2010, at 1:25 PM, Andrew Lindesay wrote: Hi Pascal; I'm adding some mods in JavaMonitor too (for WOWODC) and Andrew Lindesay also have stuff in LEWOStuff to use mod_proxy_ajp. I've actually taken that framework out again as I was not using it any more, but if anybody wants it, happy to pass on the material. It did work quite well last I used it. cheers. ___ Andrew Lindesay www.silvereye.co.nz Since there was a mention of AJP ...just a quick shibboleth note in here for the search engines. If you're using shibboleth and reading attributes sent from an identity provider, the most secure way to receive them is as environment variables (versus http headers). So, AJP/Tomcat would be the most secure way to use shibboleth. I haven't used Andrew's frameworks but they should definitely get a good look in a scenario like above. Tim Worman UCLA GSEIS ___ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
