1 am considering hosting a python based application on Amazon . com EC2. It will likely be really useful to understand to buy a EC2 and S3 combo. Does typical ($7/month) hosting that is shared rival the bandwidth cost + EC2 1 instance + S3 storage? (will the price difference be minimal?) I realize that this varies, Are you able to share your cost/month as well as your encounters with Amazon . com cloud generally.

PS: I'm not searching for your comments ought to about the unpredicted down time and closed SLA etc.

You don't need to get estimations using their company people. There is a calculator with this kind of factor.

EC2 prices begins at 10c/h. .1 * 24 * 30 = $72/month + bandwidth + storage.

EC2 nodes also aren't everything easy to setup and gaze after. There's no persistent storage, you have to make certain all information is offloaded to S3 prior to the instance is ended (or has this transformed lately? Haven't investigated Elastic Block Store yet). To make use of it seriously, you'll need some kind of monitoring and load balancing tools, to instantly start/stop instances when needed, based when needed, and also to share information between your instances. Super awesome technology, although not for any small project.

Most likely simpler for comparable money to lease a minimal energy P4 box, from the webhost. If you do not need much grunt, a VPS (Vps) is a great start for approximately $15+/month. You are able to usually upgrade the VPS, with increased processor availability, more RAM and disk, simply by contacting your webhost.

As Gary states, EC2 is ideal in case your demand changes drastically over short amounts of time. In the event that's not your circumstances, I'd search for another solution.

Amazon . com provides inadequate customer support as well as for small deployments it is extremely costly in comparison to options.

I usually recommend against hosting that is shared accounts because you are given a slot on the physical server, and slots are provided to each Tom Dick and Harry therefore if Dick's website causes large SQL queries to fill the /tmp/ partition, the whole server will crash as well as your website goes offline because Dick did not write his code correctly.

You certainly wish to have a devoted server rather than a hosting that is shared account. Factor is, if you prefer a hardware devoted server you are searching at 100s of dollars monthly.

The answer: Rackspace Cloud

Rackspace provides a much better service that Amazon . com AWS at a small fraction of the price. A fundamental Rackspace Cloud Server (devoted simply to you) costs around $11/mo as well as their customer support is amazingly good. (For instance, you are able to really Speak with someone via phone or live chat, rather than needing to publish in community support forums. With amazon . com you need to sign up for a yearly service contract to be able to speak with anybody, that amounted to around $250/year)

I recommend anybody considering Amazon's EC2 or S3 services should have a look at Rackspace because it appears to be the greatest cloud-hosting service on the internet for small deployments.

When you hit the objective where your internet site is eating through a lot more than $5,000/mo price of bandwidth and disk usage this is where Amazon . com turns into a better deal, however for small deployments Amazon . com is really a terrible waste of cash and do not be prepared to have any tech support unless of course you have to pay them tons of money for this.

Rackspace completely! W00t!!

Well, an EC2 instance for any month costs 72$. Storage: simple to do the calculation knowing just how much you'll need. How shall we be designed to know?

For low finish, single machine hosting, you are most likely best using the $7 hosting account. In my opinion, evaluating such things as disk space and memory between website hosts is not valuable unless of course you intend on using each and every byte. Opt for the one which meets your requirements the very best.

That being stated, if you want to scale your website up and lower to satisfy load demands, Amazon . com really performs exceptionally well.

Per host, you'll find cheaper colo, however with Amazon . com you pay for which you utilize. If you want 50 web servers for any 8 hour peak time, but only 10 for that relaxation during the day, you are likely to avoid wasting cash.

In case your bandwidth needs are low, it'll most likely be cheaper to choose the reduced-cost hosting companies. Amazon . com EC2 takes care of if you want plenty of reliable bandwidth and relatively couple of compute instances.