<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Multisourced Production Infrastructure: History, and a stab at the Future</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/05/26/multisourced-production-infrastructure-history-and-a-stab-at-the-future/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/05/26/multisourced-production-infrastructure-history-and-a-stab-at-the-future/</link>
	<description>Made with only the finest 1's and 0's</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 21:20:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/05/26/multisourced-production-infrastructure-history-and-a-stab-at-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-1295</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 01:13:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=301#comment-1295</guid>
		<description>m0j0, 

thanks for the great post - it is a good overview of where we as an industry are and how we got there. And more importantly, what can you do today if you need to get a service up. Some problems are solved, others are in the works (and maybe some are still overlooked).

BTW, also thanks for all your input on AppLogic (you&#039;re in the top 5 posters). Just a few notes: we&#039;re working on a global application control panel (allowing you to have a common view between all your apps, no matter where they are, and move them around as you please); we have, in fact, added auto-mounting of new volumes (straight per your request). We still leave little disk space and, by default, have no swap (except in the VPS templates) -- but have added a simple and safe way to resize volumes.

While we are away from BigTable-like scalability for relational databases, clustered MySQL, with a little bit of help and some understanding, should be able to take people from start to at least some level of scaling. (We&#039;ll be looking to see at what the PhDs will turn out -- or the open source community on more scalable databases -- it is the 21st century, after all!)

Scott, how is AppEngine competitive to EC2? They appear to provide completely different levels of abstraction... this is a bit like saying that PDAs compete with desktops (i.e., while to a degree you can do some things equally well on both, they are still apples and oranges). AppEngine provides an application stack (and in the future, more than one); EC2 provides VMs on demand... Now, if you are saying that AppEngine is more attractive to developers than EC2 because they don&#039;t have to deal with infrastructure, images, /etc/fstabs, etc., I would agree. However, sysadmins are unlikely to get on the AppEngine bandwagon -- or at least I haven&#039;t seen anything that will make them do that.

Regards,
-- Peter</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>m0j0, </p>
<p>thanks for the great post &#8211; it is a good overview of where we as an industry are and how we got there. And more importantly, what can you do today if you need to get a service up. Some problems are solved, others are in the works (and maybe some are still overlooked).</p>
<p>BTW, also thanks for all your input on AppLogic (you&#8217;re in the top 5 posters). Just a few notes: we&#8217;re working on a global application control panel (allowing you to have a common view between all your apps, no matter where they are, and move them around as you please); we have, in fact, added auto-mounting of new volumes (straight per your request). We still leave little disk space and, by default, have no swap (except in the VPS templates) &#8212; but have added a simple and safe way to resize volumes.</p>
<p>While we are away from BigTable-like scalability for relational databases, clustered MySQL, with a little bit of help and some understanding, should be able to take people from start to at least some level of scaling. (We&#8217;ll be looking to see at what the PhDs will turn out &#8212; or the open source community on more scalable databases &#8212; it is the 21st century, after all!)</p>
<p>Scott, how is AppEngine competitive to EC2? They appear to provide completely different levels of abstraction&#8230; this is a bit like saying that PDAs compete with desktops (i.e., while to a degree you can do some things equally well on both, they are still apples and oranges). AppEngine provides an application stack (and in the future, more than one); EC2 provides VMs on demand&#8230; Now, if you are saying that AppEngine is more attractive to developers than EC2 because they don&#8217;t have to deal with infrastructure, images, /etc/fstabs, etc., I would agree. However, sysadmins are unlikely to get on the AppEngine bandwagon &#8212; or at least I haven&#8217;t seen anything that will make them do that.</p>
<p>Regards,<br />
&#8211; Peter</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Sheehan</title>
		<link>http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/05/26/multisourced-production-infrastructure-history-and-a-stab-at-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-1293</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Sheehan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 22:02:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=301#comment-1293</guid>
		<description>This is one of the more insightful posts that I have come across that truly articulates the pain that startusp went through (and continue to go through but in different ways) while discussing it from the technology perspective. I too have been through a few startup booms and busts and you have nailed it in terms of the shift from get lots of cash to get a technologically sound product that has an actual business model.

I see that you mention GoGrid along side EC2, Media Temple, AppLogic and the likes. First off, I&#039;m the guy tasked with evangelizing the GoGrid technology so I&#039;m pleased that you and others have realized what a powerful offering GoGrid brings to startups. 

To dive into the tech a bit, it is rather fascinating to read how people view these offerings as purely for sys-admins or developers and that they might be conceived as being mutually exclusive. In my mind, whichever technology solution you decide on should be one that completes the 80/20 rule, but for all parties involved, with 80 meeting the needs and 20 they could care less about. GoGrid tries to fill holes that other providers may have (e.g., root/admin access, full Win/Linux images, persistence, free load balancing). Obviously, there may be deficiencies with any offering but all the different providers are working for fill those holes.

I&#039;m curious about the &quot;gotchas&quot; that you talk about. Any product has gotchas, thus the idea about 80/20...hopefully 80 percent of your needs will be met.

I encourage anyone who is interested in looking at GoGrid as a fundamental offering for startups to contact me (through the GoGrid blog) as I can help evaluate needs and clarify options. What might be good for one, won&#039;t be good for another.

Again, thanks for the comprehensive read!

-Michael</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is one of the more insightful posts that I have come across that truly articulates the pain that startusp went through (and continue to go through but in different ways) while discussing it from the technology perspective. I too have been through a few startup booms and busts and you have nailed it in terms of the shift from get lots of cash to get a technologically sound product that has an actual business model.</p>
<p>I see that you mention GoGrid along side EC2, Media Temple, AppLogic and the likes. First off, I&#8217;m the guy tasked with evangelizing the GoGrid technology so I&#8217;m pleased that you and others have realized what a powerful offering GoGrid brings to startups. </p>
<p>To dive into the tech a bit, it is rather fascinating to read how people view these offerings as purely for sys-admins or developers and that they might be conceived as being mutually exclusive. In my mind, whichever technology solution you decide on should be one that completes the 80/20 rule, but for all parties involved, with 80 meeting the needs and 20 they could care less about. GoGrid tries to fill holes that other providers may have (e.g., root/admin access, full Win/Linux images, persistence, free load balancing). Obviously, there may be deficiencies with any offering but all the different providers are working for fill those holes.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m curious about the &#8220;gotchas&#8221; that you talk about. Any product has gotchas, thus the idea about 80/20&#8230;hopefully 80 percent of your needs will be met.</p>
<p>I encourage anyone who is interested in looking at GoGrid as a fundamental offering for startups to contact me (through the GoGrid blog) as I can help evaluate needs and clarify options. What might be good for one, won&#8217;t be good for another.</p>
<p>Again, thanks for the comprehensive read!</p>
<p>-Michael</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: m0j0</title>
		<link>http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/05/26/multisourced-production-infrastructure-history-and-a-stab-at-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-1279</link>
		<dc:creator>m0j0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:36:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=301#comment-1279</guid>
		<description>Hi Scott, 

FIrst, regarding DNS, the problem isn&#039;t so much getting distributed, redundant dns, it&#039;s getting it in the numbers you need it. I think the providers have their services set up wrong, but that&#039;s a problem I don&#039;t have the entrepreneurial spirit to solve at the moment :) 

Anyway, you can get something like 100,000 requests for $100 per month from ultradns. You can get it from securityspace.com for less, and there&#039;s nothing on their site about number of requests that I&#039;ve found, but it can be had. Some dedicated hosting providers also let you use their dns, but I&#039;ve never ventured down that path, because I haven&#039;t found one that gives you the control I&#039;d like to have (some require a support ticket to add/change a DNS record - blech). 

As for 301&#039;s, it was kind of an example, and a bad one, as you point out. Maybe everything that any Apache module can do can be emulated in app code. 

I don&#039;t doubt that AppEngine changes the game, and to that extent, it can be a competitor by creating a new playing field, which is The Google Way. But I think they target two very different types of development teams and systems groups. It&#039;s going to be interesting to see how it plays out. I think system administration will be forever changed as a result of these disruptive paradigms, and I think it&#039;s long overdue, to be honest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Scott, </p>
<p>FIrst, regarding DNS, the problem isn&#8217;t so much getting distributed, redundant dns, it&#8217;s getting it in the numbers you need it. I think the providers have their services set up wrong, but that&#8217;s a problem I don&#8217;t have the entrepreneurial spirit to solve at the moment <img src='http://www.protocolostomy.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  </p>
<p>Anyway, you can get something like 100,000 requests for $100 per month from ultradns. You can get it from securityspace.com for less, and there&#8217;s nothing on their site about number of requests that I&#8217;ve found, but it can be had. Some dedicated hosting providers also let you use their dns, but I&#8217;ve never ventured down that path, because I haven&#8217;t found one that gives you the control I&#8217;d like to have (some require a support ticket to add/change a DNS record &#8211; blech). </p>
<p>As for 301&#8242;s, it was kind of an example, and a bad one, as you point out. Maybe everything that any Apache module can do can be emulated in app code. </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t doubt that AppEngine changes the game, and to that extent, it can be a competitor by creating a new playing field, which is The Google Way. But I think they target two very different types of development teams and systems groups. It&#8217;s going to be interesting to see how it plays out. I think system administration will be forever changed as a result of these disruptive paradigms, and I think it&#8217;s long overdue, to be honest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/05/26/multisourced-production-infrastructure-history-and-a-stab-at-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-1275</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 17:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=301#comment-1275</guid>
		<description>Regarding 301s and AppEngine:  It can be done.  The program running on AppEngine is handed a request.  It is the responsibility of that program to provide a response.  That response can have a code of 301 and a Location header.  But that&#039;s just a minor detail.  AppEngine is positioned to be a &lt;i&gt;major&lt;/i&gt; competitor to EC2.  Especially as new features are added to it.

Also, you mentioned that in 2008 you can get redundant, globally-distributed DNS for &quot;relatively little money&quot;.  Care to share where one can get this?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding 301s and AppEngine:  It can be done.  The program running on AppEngine is handed a request.  It is the responsibility of that program to provide a response.  That response can have a code of 301 and a Location header.  But that&#8217;s just a minor detail.  AppEngine is positioned to be a <i>major</i> competitor to EC2.  Especially as new features are added to it.</p>
<p>Also, you mentioned that in 2008 you can get redundant, globally-distributed DNS for &#8220;relatively little money&#8221;.  Care to share where one can get this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: m0j0</title>
		<link>http://www.protocolostomy.com/2008/05/26/multisourced-production-infrastructure-history-and-a-stab-at-the-future/comment-page-1/#comment-1274</link>
		<dc:creator>m0j0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 14:49:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.protocolostomy.com/?p=301#comment-1274</guid>
		<description>Hi Justin, 

I&#039;ll agree that EC2 is more admin-friendly than AppEngine, I don&#039;t think EC2 really makes it a &#039;no-brainer&#039; for a sysadmin either. Rollout is only a tiny fraction of what a sysadmin does, of course, and you don&#039;t address how EC2 has made is really easy to perform ongoing management, maintenance, disaster recovery, backup, etc. I would guess that the reason for this is because... well... the model for doing these things isn&#039;t exactly &quot;same old same old&quot;. 

I&#039;m really excited about working within a computing paradigm that has yet to clearly define itself and is therefore subject to constant, drastic change. I&#039;m also hoping that persistent storage for EC2 makes its way to the rest of the user community sooner than later, because I think that solves *one* of the problems with managing EC2, and can make probably *all* of the rest of the issues a little bit easier to deal with. Static IPs were also nice, but still left a couple of issues unsolved. From what I&#039;ve seen, EC2 seems to me to be the frontrunner out of all of these solutions if you&#039;re coming from a sysadmin background, and it&#039;s progressing rapidly toward being a no-brainer, but it&#039;s not soup yet, and the issues like global distribution and tighter integration amongst the various services one might use are still up in the air. 

I hate to sound like I&#039;m complaining, because I&#039;m really more interested in talking about how these solutions might look or where they might come from. I&#039;m just trying to start a dialog here that I haven&#039;t seen discussed elsewhere. 

Thanks for posting!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Justin, </p>
<p>I&#8217;ll agree that EC2 is more admin-friendly than AppEngine, I don&#8217;t think EC2 really makes it a &#8216;no-brainer&#8217; for a sysadmin either. Rollout is only a tiny fraction of what a sysadmin does, of course, and you don&#8217;t address how EC2 has made is really easy to perform ongoing management, maintenance, disaster recovery, backup, etc. I would guess that the reason for this is because&#8230; well&#8230; the model for doing these things isn&#8217;t exactly &#8220;same old same old&#8221;. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m really excited about working within a computing paradigm that has yet to clearly define itself and is therefore subject to constant, drastic change. I&#8217;m also hoping that persistent storage for EC2 makes its way to the rest of the user community sooner than later, because I think that solves *one* of the problems with managing EC2, and can make probably *all* of the rest of the issues a little bit easier to deal with. Static IPs were also nice, but still left a couple of issues unsolved. From what I&#8217;ve seen, EC2 seems to me to be the frontrunner out of all of these solutions if you&#8217;re coming from a sysadmin background, and it&#8217;s progressing rapidly toward being a no-brainer, but it&#8217;s not soup yet, and the issues like global distribution and tighter integration amongst the various services one might use are still up in the air. </p>
<p>I hate to sound like I&#8217;m complaining, because I&#8217;m really more interested in talking about how these solutions might look or where they might come from. I&#8217;m just trying to start a dialog here that I haven&#8217;t seen discussed elsewhere. </p>
<p>Thanks for posting!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

