Looking to have 100% uptime (or at least the same uptime as amazon). Want it 100% failover. Master/slave relationship or multiple instances running, whatever it takes. Easily scalable. I would prefer someone with experience with Amazon Ec2 / S3 to explain to me the setup. I understand the basic concepts but not enough to implement. If you are willing to walk me through the process and troubleshoot it with me as I go through setting it up I'm willing to pay you to help me. Thanks for looking. Please leave the info in this thread or let me know what you'd charge to take it to email.
I'm pretty confused about your actual needs. What do you want really? To create something similar to amazon s3/ec2? Or to host your *stuff* on a similar thing?
I'm building an ad server and require 100% uptime or as close as possible. I want uptime that is the same as amazon. I also want it scalable. Some people mentioned to me a possible solutions were servers in different places in the country with some dns/loadbancing/slave/master setup to get what I want, however it seems real expensive to scale that. So I want 100% uptime or as close as possible with the ability to scale without costing a gazillion dollars. ec2/s3 sounds like the best solution based on what i read but I'm open to suggestions also.
Amazon will prove more costly on the long run. Also you'll need something that is 100% customisable. What you can do is either multiple syncronized locations which are software balanced (not load balancing), thus giving better response times and a failover system. Or you could go with a single location mirrored and load balanced system. Either ways what is your budget?
single location is not an option. A tree could fall and knock out my server. my budget is preferably the cheapeast i can get 100% uptime. I'd prefer not to spend more than $250 per month starting out, in an ideal world of course. What would the solution you suggest cost?
Considering it will have a minimum of 2 servers and quite some bandwidth a $250 budget isn't sufficient. You will have to consider that you will need 2 decent servers at least serving a good amount of data to visitors. I would go with at least a powerful dual core with 4 GB of ram. 2 of those would set you back at least $400 with no management or monitoring.
@cabron - I appreciate the input however $400+ per month is much higher than an amazon web services solution. My budget isn't dependent on having the money, it's dependent on spending the money wisely. For $500/month i can pay the best in the business to manage my setup on amazon's network (http://rightscale.com/) On top of that, if the web hosting business can't keep a site up 100% of the time, just one single site (barring large acts of god), with a simple solution for the webmaster, they need to rewind to 1996 and start over. I appreciate the input however having my site on amazon still seems like the best/most cost efficient solution and I'd love to have come ec2 experts weigh in.
That's $500 additional costs. And i really don't thing you looked into it really that deep as you should or probably didn't understand how amazon works. Just the 2500 computing instances would cost you $250. And you will use a lot more. Add the bandwidth and everything else and it will blow a whole in your budget. Don't believe me? Go ahead and buy it.
@cabron- not that I don't believe you I wonder if a simple dns failover might work for me. for instance..... site goes down, dns switches to another host, however.... I don't need host2 do do anything except just return a blank page. or, it's ok if it returns nothing as long as it's not dead, ie a "sorry we are broken" page instead of locking everything up.
I'm afraid you don't understand the need for both cpu power and bandwidth required. A backup server would mean a waste of a server as it would be rarely needed. The solution that i proposed (splitting load between 2 server in 2 locations based on geoip tracking) is far more efficient and a good money saver.
"A backup server would mean a waste of a server as it would be rarely needed." I assumed it could just redirect to a shared hosting account I have with a "we are down" page. I already pay multiple hosts.
That would look ver unpro and not worthy of an ad network... If you do something i suggest you do it right...
@cabron - my main problem is when/if the site goes down that the ad serving widget will lock up the site of everybody that is using it. The main customers I've talked with do not want their site locking up, they don't mind the downtime on my end (and it shouldn't happenn anyway), just if it does they don't want it locking up their sites. So if the solution is feasible could you point me in the direction? Even if it's less than 100% professional? it's better tahn locking everybody up. and I can grow from there. thanks for the help also.....
I can offer you a Whole system which will provide you 100% Uptime. You get 2 Dedicated Servers with 2 Load Balancing Servers. Starting at 600 / Month. We offer fully managed Support as well. Please contact me if interested. We offer 2 Load Balancing Servers at 300 / Month. PM if you wish to have more information.
@torhost - thanks, but what about just for the dns failover solution I mentioned? Say I just want 1 website and if it's down just have it return a blank page from another server?
Buy a good server for your main site. That will set you back about $200. Then do a DNS fallover and buy a hosting account from HostGator or BlueHost or something like that. That'll cost you about $10. It's probably the best way
Thanks cameron, so it WILL work that way then? good stuff my number one goal is I can't serve a dead page. does anybody recommend any good outsourced host managers that could set that up for me? Not the hosts, I already have accounts at knownhost/dreamhost but the failover, and maybe do monthly monitoring? thanks. or should I just open another thread hear for the request?
my final answer the poor boys guide to near perfect uptime 1. failover dns http://www.dnsmadeeasy.com/ -should give me less than 10 minutes downtime anywhere (180 ttl) 2. I will have my main site on server one. Shared hosting for server 2. 3. Any non-script file goes automatically to amazon s3 (pretty persistent) 4. all scripts are duplicated to each server. I will have a script (from my home computer) replicate the database every ten minutes from server1 to server 2 that's it, so even if hardware failure at server one, the dns should trip over, then data at server 2 should be within 10 minutes old (acceptable) but I can work on improving it.