Amazon Betas 'Elastic' Grid Computing Service 78
RebornData writes "I receieved an e-mail this morning inviting me to participate in a limited beta of Amazon EC2: the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud. It's a grid computing service that allows you to create and upload your own Linux-based machine images and run them in Amazon's system, starting at $.10 per "instance hour" (each machine instance being equivalent to a 1.7GHz Xeon with 1.75GB of RAM, and 160GB disk). You can use their tools to create and start new instances dynamically to meet whatever your particular capacity needs are at any given moment. Fedora Core 3 and 4 are explicitly supported, but any distro based on the 2.6 kernel should work. The service documentation provides more technical details. Unfortunately, it appears that the beta is limited to existing Amazon S3 users, and is already full."
Burstable Servers (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally I don't have any need for a scalable system such as this, but it certainly opens the possibility for products or projects that may not otherwise be feasible.
Have a CPU intensive batch job that can broken up and distributed? Use these boxes during the run then eliminate them when it's done. Only pay for the time you use.
At a previous job I had a task that would have been perfect for a burst-able cloud like this. Example:
Every evening we had a large number of scanned tiff images that needed to be manipulated, and a short time window in which to do it. Tiff image manipulation takes a lot of CPU resources and time. We ended up purchasing a bunch of blade servers that sat idle for the 22 hours a day they we not running images. Something like what Amazon is offering may have been a very high performance and cost effective solution to that type of problem. The control via web services could automate the whole process.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It seems like the only serious problem would be getting the 20GB TIFF (or 8 GBs of WAV files) over to the server instance in the first place.
Having to move all your data over to the server and back adds significant set-up overhead, particularly if you only need the monster for 2 hours at a time. When you need the numbers crunched on demand, you don't want to have to wait 6 hours while the data set squeezes its way to the bay area and back over routers.
I'm sure that there are applications for this, but qu
Use Amazon S3 (Score:3, Informative)
-R
Re: (Score:2)
I can see this as working *very* well, for companies that can deliver both with reasonable cost.
BTW - I want a datacenter full of these [egenera.com] so bad I can taste it!
You're the grid computing poster child (Score:2)
Re:You're the grid computing poster child (Score:5, Interesting)
You might want to check out Starfish [rufy.com]. It's Google's MapReduce implemented in Ruby, kind of. It makes distributed grid computing possible in six lines of code. Unbelievable, but true.
Ian
PS I've personally got nothing to do with Starfish. I read the author's blog--that's it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps I should have used an <em> tag because this is what I meant:
(Aside: why don't actual <em> tags do anything inside <blockquote> tags?)
Anyway, my point is that the ease with which you can distribute some programs across a grid with Starfish is amazing, at least to me. Also, my naive understanding is that the best problems for solving with a grid are so called "embarassingly parallel [wikipedia.org]" problems and that such
With X11, any process is griddable (Score:1, Troll)
I can already see it... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Say... (Score:4, Funny)
Service Documentation? (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe they meant the Technical Documentation [amazonwebservices.com]?
Re: (Score:1)
I use Gentoo... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but their grid isn't that big.
Elastic Grid computing? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Who uses this stuff? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Who uses this stuff? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, what if you need to do a one-off job. Which is cheaper $.10/hour or paying somebody full time, buying supplies, paying for labor to put it together, paying for power to run it, and then letting it sit there gathering dust.
There's no way you can get parts for the systems and labor for an admin to ~$72/month/server
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps I have the economics wrong, but isn't it more cost effective to build your own cluster out of discarded PCs?
You've got the economics wrong. Building your own cluster out of discarded PCs is not economic. Building your own cluster out of brand new PCs might be.
Still, leasing is attractive for many reasons. Such as predictable costs, complying with yearly budgets, etc... If you build your own cluster, and find it doesn't work as expected, or you didn't really need it, or whatever, you are pretty
Re: (Score:2)
How long would it take you to round up a few PC and build a cluster and get it connected to a high badwidth Internet connection? How much do you want to be paid per hour? What are the payrol taxes on your hourly rate. Add this all up. Assume the old PCs are free. OK now you have the buy-in price. How many hours a month will yo need to keep this system running? At what hourly rate?
No
You can also... (Score:2, Interesting)
You can also go fart around with Amazon's Web Services [amazon.com] for fun and profit.
They rolled this out a few months back, when I was one of the brave few to sit through the presentation at a programmers conference in Santa Clara (for a free t-shirt and pen.) It was actually amazingly cool and I'm planning something of my own with it. (but I ain't telling you because I wouldn't want anyone tempted to swipe my neat idea, like thinkgeek did to me once already.)
Great Pricing (Score:4, Insightful)
For example, lets say I had a MPICH (or even a custom) application that I wanted to run. I'm just some joe schoe, so I
can't use the cluster in my (academic) department. I can run my application for one hour using 1000 "computers" for about $100 USD.
That's pretty good. It would cost me $1000 to use the Sun N1 stuff AND I would have to use the N1 grid-engine to develop my app.
Can't wait to see what comes out of the Beta. People give Amazon a bad rap because they're not Google, but make no mistake: they are innovators too.
The great sea of resources. (Score:4, Informative)
In our server room we have recently begun virtualizing servers and as a result have begun to think not in terms of physical servers and hard disks anymore, but in terms of resource pools of storage and processing.
It's like we have been able to smelt our physical machines and from the molten resources forge anew.
The recoverability and fault-tolerance is amazing as well - if a physical box dies there is basically no interruption in service. If something goes awry with an image we can just pull it and restore from yesterday.
Seeing Amazon offering what seems to be more of an ocean of resource than a pool is very tantilizing.
I'm certainly not the first, but I wonder if indeed local operating systems and cpus will become something of an anacronism, and that most processing will someday occur via the internet: that it will become the world-wide-mainframe.
Obligatory Link? (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I remember 3 of my friends in the 80's coming down with GRID before the first heterosexuals were diagnosed and the CDC decided that it was not a 'gay' disease. They all died. That is why the acronym "GRID" is burned into my conscience. Please don't call anyone an a**hole before you know them, that is acting stupid.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Cost sheet (Score:3, Informative)
* Pay only for what you use.
* $0.10 per instance-hour consumed (or part of an hour consumed).
* $0.20 per GB of data transferred outside of Amazon (i.e., Internet traffic).
* $0.15 per GB-Month of Amazon S3 storage used for your images (charged by Amazon S3).
Data transferred within the Amazon EC2 environment, or between Amazon EC2 and Amazon S3, is free of charge (i.e., $0.00 per GB).
Amazon S3 usage is billed separately from Amazon EC2; charges for each service will be billed at the end of the month.
(Amazon EC2 is sold by Amazon Web Services LLC.)
What a klunky name (Score:1)
Virtual? Real? Or does it matter? (Score:2)
What a name! (Score:2)
"Amazon EC2: the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud."
Say it with me: Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud.
For God's sake, it's like a Tom Wolfe [wikipedia.org] book!
gah? (Score:1, Offtopic)
tom@bigbox ~ $ cat
model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 885
model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 885
model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 885
model name : AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 885
1.75GB of ram?
tom@bigbox ~ $ free
total used free shared buffer
Didnt SUN try this? (Score:2)
I was trying out different parameter combinations in the uCLinux kernel to check compile sizes and functionality, and wanted horsepower to compile every iteration of the kernel. But The Sun deal was a joke, I could build a few Athlon beige boxes and do it cheaper.
This deal sounds good enough for me to take it out on a spin of a day or two, but I really
Time for Multics (Score:2)
Hmm... (Score:2)
Wow! (Score:1)
And think of the possibilities...run a virtual
machine inside your Amazon VM, totally encrypted
with ssh tunnels in and out...
Sorry, I appear to be drooling!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
....What was the article about again?
Re: (Score:1)
It would be more productive going after the Oil companies instead of making people turn their computer off.
Re: (Score:2)
(serious point though: with the modern CPUs that have frequency throttling power management, running 'spare cycle' apps do waste power whereas once they wouldn't make much difference)
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds all nice in practice to buy "cheap time" but it's cheap for a reason
1. You don't own the boxes
2. It's not leased, they could go down at any moment
3. All your data is remote
4. You're subject to your net
Re: (Score:1)
I say this from experience - my employer specializes in an industry-specific data validation process, and has spent 20 years wr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
One thing about image size is it isnt mandatory to have guis on these things. I would go for something like DSL for a lightweight system image, they produce very small binaries. That only leaves the data. S3 stores bulk data nicely, but you also need a back end RDBMS, or you host mysql in a cluster all of your own.
I suspect that the next offering of amazon will be pay-to-use RDBMS with an availabilit
Re: (Score:2)
Wonder what sort of latency these clusters have, if they'd be suitable to host a BF2 server or something.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Sounds like something from the 5th element? That's one of the best compliments I've ever gotten! ¦D
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that movies output at something like 10M per frame (4000 pixels wide by 2000 pixels high by 48 bits per pixel div 8 bits per byte div 4 lossless compression factor), so you'd be talking about nearly a gigabyte for 4 seconds of footage (and my compression factor may be way off). So you can s
You're not kidding? Well, I am. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Just your data transfer charges and disk storage space (those are billed extra by Amazon) are going to cost more than the electricity to run your box overnight (and you already have the box, so its not like you're spending extra for it). Plus it takes time to upload all that video data - time which your machine is running anyway, so you might as well just use it to encode it yourself.
cpu cycles have become so commoditized that there's no point in going to the hassle of "leasing" a small virtual clust