Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> two dedicated servers with any reasonable provider and being able to have a hot-failover for everything.

Except you have to implement that hot failover yourself, rather than using something like EC2 auto-scaling groups or an RDS multi-AZ deployment. I'm not confident that I'd get it right, and the middle of a night is a hell of a time to discover that you got it wrong.




> RDS multi-zone AZ deployment

I don't know about all RDBMS brands, but if you're running Postgres then setting up a read-only slave is trivially simple. You run one command to promote it to master.

At my work we use both AWS and colo our own gear in two geographically isolated datacenters. We use AWS for highly specialized tasks (e.g., Lex) and our colocated servers for just about everything else. The savings have been tremendous -- our costs would be ~10x higher if everything was on AWS.

I think a lot of people forget just how cost-effective dedicated servers and colocation can be. If you're not allergic to dealing with the occasional hardware failure, then there's no question in my mind that it's the right way to go.


How much uptime do you need, and how much does EC2 provide? Things will depend on that.

But from what I've seen, the point may be moot. Odds are that the EC2 uptime is around the same as you'll get on a single machine VPS anywhere anyway.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: