Share what you know with millions of people

Focus is the best place to turn what you know into remarkable content
×
0

Have you heard of any companies that have "outgrown" AWS?

AWS is clearly an excellent service for SMBs... but what happens as they start to scale? I am curious to hear if cost, security, potential downtime, and the limitations of a standardized system ever force growing companies to shift to a different model.

Attachments

Best Answer

1
Robert Keahey
IT, Business and Social Strategist/Commentator, SummaLogic LLC
Posted on Dec. 13, 2011

Hmmm... your question kind flies in the face of "cloud"... Aren't clouds supposed to provide on-demand elasticity at a lower cost with increased security and higher resiliency?

All kidding aside, I haven't heard of any scenarios where a company has "outgrown" EC2 for the reasons you mentioned. Obviously there was a lot of angst over the outages back in April and later in the summer. And there are some interesting case studies such as Netflix that "engineers around" what they believe are some shortcomings in the AWS/EC2 offering.

I think what a lot of companies (e.g., Zynga) do is architect their systems to take advantage of the best qualities of different cloud computing models. Zynga does development and testing in public clouds, but runs "production" in its own private data centers (clouds). They feel this gives them economic advantage and flexibility for dev/test, and better control over security, elasticity and failure management for production. For the typical SMB I just don't see this "multi-architecture" strategy as a requirement. The vast majority of them can live within the "standardized system" constraints you mentioned and be perfectly happy.

In terms of innovation and feature richness, I don't think EC2 is lacking in those areas. A whole ecosystem has grown up around their public cloud offering and I believe Amazon is not ready to relinquish control of the market. But there are some pretty impressive competitors entering the market with Open Compute Project and Open Stack-based offerings, which allows them to leverage the collective thinking and innovation of the bigger community. So I think Amazon will feel a little "heat" over the next couple of years.

Beyond that, all of Amazon's cloud offerings still seem to have plenty of legs under them, and I don't anticipate that there will be many customers who will push the limits on the business and performance aspects you mentioned - at least not for a while.

0
Lauren Buchsbaum
Lauren Buchsbaum Replied on Dec. 13, 2011

Shhhh... I know it was a bit of a heretical question. Hearing examples like Netflix's where they were able to architect around AWS is an interesting workaround. And, obviously, a company would have to have a VERY specific need to either "engineer around" or abandon Amazon's platform altogether. Thanks for the awesome insight, as always!

0
Patrick Pushor
Patrick Pushor Replied on Dec. 14, 2011

You are focusing on capacity. If you shift your perspective to "performance" there are examples of organizations that haven't been able to achieve the performance they need for their applications via an IaaS provider. The push for cloud providers (on behalf of their customers) to adopt solid state disk solutions is one such example of needing higher performance. It could be argued that there is always an alternate approach to performance related problems (ie. caching and moving disk intensive I/O based operations to be done in memory).

0
Robert Keahey
Robert Keahey Replied on Dec. 14, 2011

I would suggest that the Netflix example is more about performance and resiliency than capacity. Specifically, the avoidance of EBS due to performance limitations. Thoughts?