Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by paulryanrogers 1904 days ago
> Sure, you can screw up on prem. But if you are only marginally competent spinning up services/servers/clusters takes but an instant, it's dirt cheap, and vastly more reliable.

Do you mean on premise you can spin up virtual servers and virtual clusters instantly? Because I imagine you'd have to order, physically rack, and setup the bare metal if one doesn't have the capacity already.
2 comments
russellendicott 1904 days ago
Yeah. I used to work for a mid sized company and they did a lot of on-prem. Even there it took a lot of lead time to add 20 physical nodes to a cluster.

Now I work for an Global Enterprise and the benefits of cloud aren't necessarily about reliability--they're more about the speed and efficiency that pet projects can be spun up and spun down without international labor laws and multi-year leases.

link
iJohnDoe 1904 days ago
Exactly. Sure, my cousin Earl can spin up a container and some VMs. Will they be secure? Probably not. Will they be backed up and offsite failover? Probably not. Will they get ransomware at some point? Probably.

There is no need to make blanket statements about on-prem vs. cloud. You have to weigh the pros and cons as any other business decision.

It’s about controlling you’re own destiny with either decision.

link
paulryanrogers 1904 days ago
Not trying to make blanket statements. I'm actually a fan of on prem when load and reliability needs fit.
link
petre 1904 days ago
You can use Proxmox. We have an on prem cluster. It works reliably as long as your hardware works. It does LXC, VMs, migrations to another node, snasphots, ZFS. We hand an outage when a router died. Surprisingly a bare metal FreeBSD server directly connected to the public network was still up when the VMs were unacessible.
link