Got up and running with Pacific Rack in two hours! - GoFuckYourself.com

x582 · 10-13-2009, 05:33 PM

I got a mainstream project launching soon and we've been running tests in the cloud (Amazon EC2 and Rackspace Cloud) for a while. Now, cloud prices are insane compared to what we're used to pay in adult - but it's great for scalability which is what we wanted.

Performance wise we are a bit disappointed with EC2 (slow I/O) and we've had just countless issues with Rackspace Cloud. So we started to look for either managed colocation or self-managed dedicated servers that could be provided fast in case we need to scale our application servers stack.

Of course going with a traditional host is not going to provide the advantages the cloud is offering, like adding 20 servers for 10 hours and paying only for 10 hours (or scaling to 4,000 servers in 3 days like the guys at Animoto).

We got 1 server running in about two hours with Pacific Rack. We will compare performance with our virtual instances to see how much more request per seconds we can do with dedicated hardware vs virtual instances.

Another alternative could be providers like Softlayer that can provide both dedicated servers and cloud instances. For people working with viral mainstream stuff and need some scalability, Pacific Rack seems to have their act together. The real test will be when we ask them to put up 10 servers and see how fast they can do that, but it looks promising!

Toma · 10-13-2009, 05:37 PM

you bought twitter?

Spudstr · 10-13-2009, 05:47 PM

amazons EC2 is horrible for hosting, its built and ment for data processing in bulk. Not serving websites.

x582 · 10-13-2009, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toma

you bought twitter?

No, but mainstream is a bit different than content delivery where you can do pretty much everything with one server.

We start with

1 Web/Load Balancing Server (HAProxy and Nginx)
2 Application Servers (PHP-FPM)
1 Staging Application Server (PHP-FPM)
1 MySQL Master
1 MySQL Slave

This is a basic setup that allows you to scale.

d-null · 10-13-2009, 05:56 PM

will be watching the thread and interested to hear more about your project

alias · 10-13-2009, 08:45 PM

My old admin *might* work there, he rules.

WiredGuy · 10-13-2009, 08:54 PM

PacificRack was always one host that had a very rapid setup/installation turnaround. I've always had servers (from 1-5 at a time) setup same business day.
WG

10-13-2009, 05:33 PM	#1
x582 Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: heh? Posts: 609	Got up and running with Pacific Rack in two hours! I got a mainstream project launching soon and we've been running tests in the cloud (Amazon EC2 and Rackspace Cloud) for a while. Now, cloud prices are insane compared to what we're used to pay in adult - but it's great for scalability which is what we wanted. Performance wise we are a bit disappointed with EC2 (slow I/O) and we've had just countless issues with Rackspace Cloud. So we started to look for either managed colocation or self-managed dedicated servers that could be provided fast in case we need to scale our application servers stack. Of course going with a traditional host is not going to provide the advantages the cloud is offering, like adding 20 servers for 10 hours and paying only for 10 hours (or scaling to 4,000 servers in 3 days like the guys at Animoto). We got 1 server running in about two hours with Pacific Rack. We will compare performance with our virtual instances to see how much more request per seconds we can do with dedicated hardware vs virtual instances. Another alternative could be providers like Softlayer that can provide both dedicated servers and cloud instances. For people working with viral mainstream stuff and need some scalability, Pacific Rack seems to have their act together. The real test will be when we ask them to put up 10 servers and see how fast they can do that, but it looks promising!

10-13-2009, 05:37 PM	#2
Toma Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 1,248	you bought twitter? __________________ .!.

10-13-2009, 05:47 PM	#3
Spudstr Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: In a Tater Patch Posts: 2,321	amazons EC2 is horrible for hosting, its built and ment for data processing in bulk. Not serving websites. __________________ Managed Hosting - Colocation - Network Services Yellow Fiber Networks icq: 19876563

10-13-2009, 05:56 PM	#5
d-null . . . Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: NY Posts: 13,724	will be watching the thread and interested to hear more about your project __________________ __________________ Looking for a custom TUBE SCRIPT that supports massive traffic, load balancing, billing support, and h264 encoding? Hit up Konrad! Looking for designs for your websites or custom tubesite design? Hit up Zuzana Designs Check out the #1 WordPress SEO Plugin: CyberSEO Suite

10-13-2009, 08:45 PM	#6
alias aliasx Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 19,010	My old admin might work there, he rules. __________________ https://porncorporation.com

10-13-2009, 08:54 PM	#7
WiredGuy Pounding Googlebot Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 34,469	PacificRack was always one host that had a very rapid setup/installation turnaround. I've always had servers (from 1-5 at a time) setup same business day. WG __________________ I play with Google.