Quote:
Originally Posted by chaze
No it's not, spreading gibberish again.
Cloud computing enables you to cluster several servers in different locations. This is not superior and has a much higher fail rate. The bonus is you can use a bunch of cheap computers and link them for what seems like a super computer but really it's just a time bomb. Every major service that rolled over to clouds like Amazon have had more downtime and more load issues, that is definably not superior.
It's a good idea at best but a good connections and round robin dns is better and more reliable as of now.
|
You could not be more mistaken. What baddag said was correct. You have no idea what you are talking about. Part of cloud hosting could be in mutliple locations, but the initial redundancy later is all in 1 location. Just as spudstr said, if a virtual server goes down, it has to be rebooted by another node. But the downtime is minimal compared to a single server crashingl. The only reason for multiple locations is if you are doing data replication. The bigger clouds do this, but for an extra price. Amazon I believe can provide this, but its an extra cost. In any scenario, if you take your business seriously, you are doing some sort of disaster recovery from one location to another. Most people dont because of the cost. Let me know if you need a lesson in virtualization. I am certified in both VMware and Citrix.