Comments on: Availability in the Cloud

By: One step closer to the living room: YouTube goes widescreen | Ugh!!'s Greymatter Honeypot

Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:17:27 +0000

[...] into this category, all they need to do now is improve application availability and make sure the Cloud is always available and I’ll be ready to hook up my [...]

By: Michael Sheehan

Michael Sheehan — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:05:39 +0000

@Raj,

Since Cloud Computing is pretty much an evolution of traditional computing, I think it is important to look at how things were resolved traditionally and then apply it to the Cloud. There will be more and more services that will offer these types of solutions. Redundancy within a specific grid is fine but the idea is that you need redundancy across the cloud as well.

@Randy,
Agree with that. I’m working on further defining Cloud Computing (and the Cloud Pyramid I talk about in previous posts) to include Aggregators and “Extenders” (for lack of a better term). CloudScale is probably one of many that will emerge, capitalizing on Cloud Infrastructure providers.

Thanks for your comments!
-Michael

By: Randy Bias

Randy Bias — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 06:46:39 +0000

Since 100% uptime is impossible, this is more than a valid strategy, it’s sound business sense. It’s no different than a disaster recovery site. Honestly, the key problem is that you need a way to build your application in a cloud provider agnostic way.

That’s where CloudScale comes in.

By: Raj

Raj — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:23:12 +0000

This is a good suggestion. But this is kind of applying the principles of traditional load balancing architecture/design to could or grid computing infrastructures. Doing this is good, but then it completely kills the purpose of using redundant servers on a grid/cloud anyways. 100% uptime is a necessity for Grids and Coulds ….

My 2 cents!