The LAMP (Linux, Apache, Mysql, PHP) stack great for small websites
and web apps...but what happens when you need scalability? There is no
easy and cheap way to scale.
The only way to scale with the LAMP stack is to add more
servers...but...once you split each component onto a separate server
what next? If you need to scale mysql you need a cluster, if you need
to scale apache then you need a load balancer and several servers. It
all becomes expensive, time consuming and littered with problems. I
have run many sites like this...one such site had over 20 servers! I
just don't think that is is sustainable.
Over the past year I have been working with cloud computing quite a
bit. It is not easy to move a web application to a cloud computing
platform. There are heaps of technical challenges, but, each challenge
is worth overcoming because of the huge advantages.
Let me give you an example...if you want to bring publicity to your
site or service you must aspire to get it listed in slashdot, or
techcrunch or something like that. Well...how do you think you could
scale for the traffic? Simple...create a scalable architecture, host
it on Amazon EC2, and then simply "turn the knob" (so to speak) when
traffic surges. They pay for actual usage while those servers are
active, and then simply turn that knob back down when the surge
subsides. No huge investment, no servers to install in your data
center...no fuss!
Web-scale is all about huge growth. If your business is in this area
then cloud computing is your friend.
> The LAMP (Linux, Apache, Mysql, PHP) stack great for small websites
> and web apps...but what happens when you need scalability? There is no
> easy and cheap way to scale.
> The only way to scale with the LAMP stack is to add more
> servers...but...once you split each component onto a separate server
> what next? If you need to scale mysql you need a cluster, if you need
> to scale apache then you need a load balancer and several servers. It
> all becomes expensive, time consuming and littered with problems. I
> have run many sites like this...one such site had over 20 servers! I
> just don't think that is is sustainable.
> Over the past year I have been working with cloud computing quite a
> bit. It is not easy to move a web application to a cloud computing
> platform. There are heaps of technical challenges, but, each challenge
> is worth overcoming because of the huge advantages.
> Let me give you an example...if you want to bring publicity to your
> site or service you must aspire to get it listed in slashdot, or
> techcrunch or something like that. Well...how do you think you could
> scale for the traffic? Simple...create a scalable architecture, host
> it on Amazon EC2, and then simply "turn the knob" (so to speak) when
> traffic surges. They pay for actual usage while those servers are
> active, and then simply turn that knob back down when the surge
> subsides. No huge investment, no servers to install in your data
> center...no fuss!
> Web-scale is all about huge growth. If your business is in this area
> then cloud computing is your friend.
> Ross
The LAMP stack itself isnt dead, although you do make some valuable
points regarding scaling databases etc, scaling web by itself is
becoming fairly trivial these days with the right infrastructure
underneath (and this is where I think your point is really aimed at).
Traditional dedicated hosting is not dead yet, but will be in the
future, with cloud/utility computing leading the way, enabling you to
respond to rapid changes in demand without any concern, which is an
impossibility with dedicated hosting at the moment.
I also believe that migrating existing applications to cloud platforms
is going to get easier and easier, but then I do have a vested
interest there :)
Look forward to speaking to you all at the next meeting.
Yes, I made some sweeping statements, I have a habit of doing that
when I am excited...but, in the terms of web-scale computing I believe
that the traditional LAMP stack is "less useful" than a cloud of a
million computers.
Indeed, and pickup up where you left off in your blog, Hadoop is one tool that could let you do that: http://hadoop.apache.org/core/
It's a mapreduce system designed to run on Linux in the style of what Google does. It also comes with a clustered file system (again a la Google style).
Otherwise, you're into your normal clusters using cluster management software.
-- Alex.
> Ross > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AWS User group" group. > To post to this group, send email to aws-user-group@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to aws-user-group-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.co.uk/group/aws-user-group?hl=en-GB > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
-- Alex Kavanagh Tinwood Ltd -- Open Source Information & Communications Solutions Delivering Freedom, Creating Value w: www.tinwood.com e: alex.kavan...@tinwood.com a: 20 Sefton Ave, NE6 5QR, Company No: 5233914 (Eng & Wales), VAT No: GB 874 8669 54
Sorry if you got this by mistake - please accept our apologies; please let us know that this message has gone astray so we don't do it again. Thanks.
|
