I looked this on Google, but needed more opinions before I devoted to either service. Has anybody had knowledge about either (or possibly both) services? What are the advantages or disadvantages that separated itself about each one? Particular regions of interest are:
I did previously work with Engine Yard, so allow me to provide you with the info on our Engine Yard Cloud service (running on AWS). I'll make you to complete your personal research in your other available choices.
- Security Each Engine Yard Cloud account is its very own full Amazon . com account behind the curtain, which means you receive full hardware-enforced, virtual machines devoted for you to operate the application. So attackers taking advantage of a zero-day buffer overflow etc. in individuals C Gems, Ruby, passenger, linux etc. only obtain access to just one account. There's no shared infrastructure within the data-path. We watch security vulnerability reviews for those aspects of our stack and also you get new patches instantly whenever you redeploy. You receive full SSH use of your instances, and obtain an ordinary server atmosphere for if you want to set up packages for example Solr or Sphinx or image manipulation etc.
I believe, hardware-level virtual machines is among the fundamentals of Amazon . com success and why nothing beats this arrived before virtual machines matured (but I am biased because I had been a VMware guy, and saw this happening instantly)
Stability You will find there's large amount of knowledge about so what can be reliable and what can't in Ruby/Rails components. Presently on our "don't deploy" list are ferret, juggernaut and awstats. Otherwise we inherit AWS uptime because we don't have shared infrastructure within the data path. AWS uptime continues to be very good, however i wouldn't attempt to operate a nuclear energy plant by using it at this time. Deploy reliability continues to be mixed lately -- Amazon . com appears to become managing a little nearer to the wind on capacity utilization, the like some occasions a capacity addition request will fail and need to be re-released.
Scalability. We've got some large programs running on Engine Yard cloud. Playmesh had the most important apple iphone application last November and cranked up ability to handle rid of it. We have benchmarked a small instance (4 mongrels) equipped to handle 85M/Reqs monthly at constant load (quite simple application). We all do suggest that people operate on bigger instances when they want lots of disk i/o, Amazon . com provides better i/o throughput to bigger instance dimensions. Regardless, adding or getting rid of capacity generally is a mouse click.
Cost Managing a small instance (4 mongrels) full-time for any month can cost you $79 on EY Cloud or .11 each hour (versus. 8.5 cents on naked Amazon . com). Including database management, but you'll pay a little amount for storage and bandwidth - which Engine Yard Cloud passes along at AWS cost. We are pretty certain that when you achieve any reasonable quantity of traffic, we are a killer deal.
Allow me to give a couple of other criteria that you desire to think about...
Support -> you receive community/forum support free of charge, but we have a ticketed support option, the premium support option will get your application viewed 24x7 and we'll inform you whenever your application goes lower and trobleshoot and fix it for you personally whether it's the supported stack this is a problem.
Community -> Many people worry about this, many people don't but Engine Yard sponsors 2 full-time Rails contributing factors, a 3 person JRuby team and subsequently gen Ruby VM, Rubinius. We are devoted to helping make Rails and Ruby the very best platform for developing web applications there's.
Automation -> you just need to watch the demo to determine it for action, but it is neat. Also we are in beta with command line git deploys, browse the knowledgebase to determine it for action.
I'm supposing that you're speaking about Engine Yard's EC2 hosting, instead of their full-service stack?
I'm dealing with Heroku, and like it. On cost, Heroku may be the obvious champion for me personally. Bandwidth pricing is abstracted by Heroku, the industry large win.
Around the security fronts, it's a little tough to tell - which is among the common critiques from the cloud. You do not have a great deal of understanding of the stack that's running on either service.
Heroku have invested a large amount in technology to watch and effortlessly manage application instances. Something goes completely wrong and also the instance is dropped and a replacement began. Wonderful stuff.
Regarding scalability, both of them are backed onto Amazon . com and leverage EC2 and also the EBS, so most likely very similar when it comes to raw capacity.