>someone who will not treat their datacenter like a home lab
What does this mean? They steal company resources for themselves, or just configure things incompetently?
What does this mean? They steal company resources for themselves, or just configure things incompetently?
Over Christmas, everything died, and the brilliant sysadmin was on holiday. Nobody could get things going again for many days and so their entire SaaS business was failing. They lost a lot of business and trust as a result.
The sysadmin is now gone and they are back on AWS.
Your forming a larger dependency on a team lead against a custom system that now is a liability as new people come to the organization don't want to adopt an abandoned poorly understood project.
1. you think it's the sysadmin's fault
2. there are no competent sysadmins out there
what magical things do they have? that every single reasonably sized enterprise doesn't have? it should be extremly easy for a small enterprise to beat any of the main clouds* - they make crap ton of profit from you
*making an assumption that your needs are reasonably static and not MASSIVELY busting up and down your infrastructure
And yes, they pay the costs of those people and take a good profit margin, and yes there are in some ways diminishing returns to go from 3 nines to 6. But most enterprises can't match that depth of concentrated expertise, certainly not most small enterprises.
seriously??!? you think you need thousands of people to to improve your effeciency and performance I would strongly suggest employing a few good infrastructure engineers/ architects who know what they're talking about - there really is no secret sauce!! just lots of kool aid on cloud
the whole cloud thing only looks wonderful and magical if your inexperienced.
re: the whole up time x9 thing is fairly useless in the real world, since the architecture of the application is really the king here!! christ on a stick i got an application running 100% for 3+ years on NT 4 because of good design (the clue is active - active - active)
also to add... availibilty zones are a very very poor mans DR
> entire SaaS business
> [ Unmentioned - Single Point of Failure Service dependent on a single admin ]
If you are fully accounting for vacation, training, sleep etc then you need a minimum of 5 admins for mission critical services. Now, you can engineer around this to reduce your staffing requirement but I wouldn't recommend going under 2 ever because accidents happen.
This business seemed one below that, without the engineering, and I would point to the mgmt, not the brilliant admin as the problem.
This story has nothing to do with AWS or on-prem.
It's a story about incompetent management allowing a single human point of failure. If they don't change that, they'll have the same problem wherever they go.
But if you want something reliable that I can spend 30 seconds writing some terraform for, it will take an entire infra team to set up and maintain it, not to mention an entire procurement process and now having to integrate a new supply chain just for a basic multi-az setup (probably without things like backups and still without basic features the cloud gives you automatically).