Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Shizrah said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
If HA is not a concern @scale offers a single node appliance configuration (SNAC) which has all the features and capabilities of a three node cluster, sans HA and rolling updates. Additional nodes can be added if the environment grows and/or the technical requirements change at a consumable price point.
What's the price for something like that? I would have to assume it would be roughly 1/3 the $25K pricetag @JaredBusch mentions. Does a customer gain the HCI abilities at 2 nodes, or do they have to fully jump to 3?
HA only at three, I asked.
For that $25k entry point for the 3-node configuration, is Scale supplying just the 3 nodes themselves, or is it a package deal that also includes a backplane switch, cables, etc.?
-
@art_of_shred The setup I got when we went with them for a 4 node setup included the backplane switch and cables.
-
@dafyre said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@art_of_shred The setup I got when we went with them for a 4 node setup included the backplane switch and cables.
So a single node would likely be a little less than the "1/3 of the cost of 3 nodes" since a single node doesn't require any of the peripherals.
-
@art_of_shred said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@dafyre said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@art_of_shred The setup I got when we went with them for a 4 node setup included the backplane switch and cables.
So a single node would likely be a little less than the "1/3 of the cost of 3 nodes" since a single node doesn't require any of the peripherals.
That'd be a question for their sales team, but I'd expect you would be right.
-
yeah, but how much is a backplane switch? I suppose it could be around $1500 (really I have no clue how much 10 Gb switches cost).
-
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
yeah, but how much is a backplane switch? I suppose it could be around $1500 (really I have no clue how much 10 Gb switches cost).
Um, not realistically. You want redundant 10GigE. That's not $1500.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
yeah, but how much is a backplane switch? I suppose it could be around $1500 (really I have no clue how much 10 Gb switches cost).
Um, not realistically. You want redundant 10GigE. That's not $1500.
How much for 2 10 Gb switches? Also how many ports do they normally include in a standard 3 server setup? 12 per switch?
-
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
yeah, but how much is a backplane switch? I suppose it could be around $1500 (really I have no clue how much 10 Gb switches cost).
Um, not realistically. You want redundant 10GigE. That's not $1500.
How much for 2 10 Gb switches? Also how many ports do they normally include in a standard 3 server setup? 12 per switch?
Number per switch varies a lot. But for each node in your cluster you need four ports, dual front plane and dual back plane. So for a three node setup you need a minimum of eight ports for the LAN and six ports for the backplane. That's total ports, not per switch. But that's fourteen total ports between the two sides (whcih can be VLANed on just two switches.)
-
Am I the only one going "@scale isn't awesome because of the price, they take all of the additional knowledge needed for the hardware side of the HA equation off the table"? Add on the custom storage layer, which was already quick before SSD came into the picture, and it's just a lot of win for small to mid size companies that have a need for their own server infrastructure.
Sure, you could build it yourself for cheaper, but it's gonna take a lot more time. The real costs in a roll-your-own solution is the time sink.
-
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
Am I the only one going "@scale isn't awesome because of the price, they take all of the additional knowledge needed for the hardware side of the HA equation off the table"? Add on the custom storage layer, which was already quick before SSD came into the picture, and it's just a lot of win for small to mid size companies that have a need for their own server infrastructure.
Sure, you could build it yourself for cheaper, but it's gonna take a lot more time. The real costs in a roll-your-own solution is the time sink.
Actually, they are not in the S side of SMB unless said SMB is doing things either wrong or is a very special case. We all know which one that likely is.
For the M side of SMB, it is a great solution for their needs.
-
I guess it really boils down to - do you need HA? If your SMB needs HA, then the cost of Scale is probably pretty great. Topped by the fact that it's an easy to use, turn-key or near turn-key solution and has full support from Scale.
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
Getting servers in the $6-8K range as JB mentioned earlier seems completely reasonable, and a significant savings considering that most SMB are rare if they need more than one worth of compute power these days.
-
someone sent me a message asking how to get the server I mentioned for $6k.
Here you go.
-
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule.
-
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule.
They probably could have benefited from some better planning.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule.
They probably could have benefited from any planning.
ftfy
-
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule.
They probably could have benefited from some better planning.
I'm guessing they had a plan, they just forwarded their phones to another 911 call center to handle the situation while they were down.
-
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule.
They probably could have benefited from some better planning.
I'm guessing they had a plan, they just forwarded their phones to another 911 call center to handle the situation while they were down.
The county sheriff announced on the radio (yeah, I still listen to it when it's time for news), no 911 service, didn't even get the calls forwarded to a different 911 center. I mean, Wooster, OH and Wayne County are small, but you don't have 2 911 centers in the county at least? I would've thought the city and county would have one each, at least service doesn't get completely interrupted if one happens to go down, sheesh.
-
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule.
They probably could have benefited from some better planning.
I'm guessing they had a plan, they just forwarded their phones to another 911 call center to handle the situation while they were down.
The county sheriff announced on the radio (yeah, I still listen to it when it's time for news), no 911 service, didn't even get the calls forwarded to a different 911 center. I mean, Wooster, OH and Wayne County are small, but you don't have 2 911 centers in the county at least? I would've thought the city and county would have one each, at least service doesn't get completely interrupted if one happens to go down, sheesh.
Actually, that doesn't surprise me at all that the only have one. What is surprising is that they didn't have agreements with the next county over to take over their calls in case of an outage. Call the phone company and just hard forward all calls to the next county... wow.. just wow.
-
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@scottalanmiller said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@travisdh1 said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
@Dashrender said in Cloud Computing vs. Hyperconvergence:
But as we are constantly drilled by @scottalanmiller, most SMBs don't need HA. They can often afford hours, or even days of downtime.
I generally agree with you. Our local 911 center was down for something like 36 hours a couple weeks back, made my head spin that. It's just the edge case to support @scottalanmiller's rule.
They probably could have benefited from some better planning.
I'm guessing they had a plan, they just forwarded their phones to another 911 call center to handle the situation while they were down.
The county sheriff announced on the radio (yeah, I still listen to it when it's time for news), no 911 service, didn't even get the calls forwarded to a different 911 center. I mean, Wooster, OH and Wayne County are small, but you don't have 2 911 centers in the county at least? I would've thought the city and county would have one each, at least service doesn't get completely interrupted if one happens to go down, sheesh.
Actually, that doesn't surprise me at all that the only have one. What is surprising is that they didn't have agreements with the next county over to take over their calls in case of an outage. Call the phone company and just hard forward all calls to the next county... wow.. just wow.
Right, that is the logical way to go. Stark should have been able to handle those calls easily.
