Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase 12»»

The Special Cloud Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 12:35 AM


SSC-Dedicated

SSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-DedicatedSSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 8:42 AM
Points: 33,049, Visits: 15,154
Comments posted to this topic are about the item The Special Cloud






Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1167902
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 12:43 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, June 3, 2014 8:16 AM
Points: 295, Visits: 1,011
I still view cloud as a matter simple renting servers but to get to rent them, you have to change your systems architecture completely. From what I've seen, azure has a long way still to go.

The power of the cloud does not at all seam to be processing power as one might think. You have to add roles for more cpu power etc. You have to do this while having no clue how much power you actually get, it's trial and error.

Another issue is the 30s limit on transactions. Ok granted, sql queries should never take this long, but since you do not know the strength of your service that you have rented, you do not know how much you need to tune your systems. What takes 2 seconds in one of the powerful servers you have today might take 20 seconds in the cloud. If you want to do a huge calculation, analyzing the market for instance, inserting millions of transactions and then doing the calculation, you have to batch this up in bits and pieces. Even the calculation itself! Because, if 30s is passed, you're screwed, your command is aborted.

So from my point of view, seeing how there are so many uncertain factors, only the "brave" would go for the cloud before we've seen some maturity of their services.
Post #1167903
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 1:01 AM
Valued Member

Valued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued MemberValued Member

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 2:11 AM
Points: 71, Visits: 155
But: is the cloud really secure ??? Everybody's moving to the cloud, companies or private persons are putting their data, also sensitive data, outside on a server somewhere in the world. Never forget, everything can be cracked....


Patrick SIMONS, MCP
Post #1167908
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 1:33 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, June 3, 2014 8:16 AM
Points: 295, Visits: 1,011
PatrickSimons (8/31/2011)
But: is the cloud really secure ??? Everybody's moving to the cloud, companies or private persons are putting their data, also sensitive data, outside on a server somewhere in the world. Never forget, everything can be cracked....


That is a very interesting question. The Swedish military certainly does not think so as it will not even send request for quotation to companies that makes use of cloud, it's one of the criteria.
Just like those working on dropbox can access everything you have in there, there is no reason a cloud company would not be able to do this.
Post #1167928
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 2:45 AM
SSC Rookie

SSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC RookieSSC Rookie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 9:45 AM
Points: 49, Visits: 287
I think they need to get past leaving things on trains or sending CDs with millions of records of data via Royal Mail (and then it getting lost!) before they even jump to cloud services here in the UK.
It seems government offices here know more about losing data than keeping it safe and introducing cloud services would just make a much bigger mess.
Post #1167948
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 6:37 AM


Old Hand

Old HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld HandOld Hand

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, May 7, 2012 9:23 AM
Points: 304, Visits: 716
Growing up, there was a phrase; "He has his head in the clouds" that suggests such a person is not paying attention, or aware of the consequences of what they are doing...

This past week a relative of mine told me that they have subscribed to one of these cloud-based backup services, and then asked me "do you think that was a wise idea?". I asked; "Did you carefully read the license agreement?" The answer of course was "No" - who reads all that legal-ease, and anyway this will now save them from buying any backup hardware.

About two days later I got a call from them in panic... "I just actually read the license agreement and it states that if they screw up or lose all my data, I have agreed not to hold them liable!!!"... Yeah, welcome to cloud-computing - too bad you clicked "I agree" before actually reading the agreement.

Its all very interesting what we are doing with the cloud and this morning's editorial brings more of that. But I still cannot help corresponding the cloud with what this country did with asbestos. We stuck it all over the place before realizing it kills people. Companies that made a fortune selling it, are now bankrupt and out of business. And people are still dying from the affects.

Sure, the cloud isnt going to kill anyone - but here we are again pushing something forward in Technology that is really still just an idea and we're making it up as we go along. That, and the fact that most average users dont read license agreements, bodes some future disaster where once again we look back and wonder - why didnt we think this through?

Simple: There's money to be made, and damn the end-users.


There's no such thing as dumb questions, only poorly thought-out answers...
Post #1168052
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 6:39 AM
Mr or Mrs. 500

Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500Mr or Mrs. 500

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 6:53 AM
Points: 581, Visits: 727
I have security and ROI concerns over this. The security concerns stem from not having control over every piece of hardware. Granted, there are companies with this complete control that are still not secure, so perhaps this isn't a valid concern. The ROI concerns center around cost. Will this system cost more to operate than housing your own hardware and hiring your own IT dept? It's the US government, so chances are there will still be a huge bureaucracy involved with or without owning their own equipment.

I want it to work, but to me it feels like throwing money at a problem without solving any of it.
Post #1168055
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 7:21 AM
SSCommitted

SSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommittedSSCommitted

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 1:35 PM
Points: 1,635, Visits: 1,970
Mattrick (8/31/2011)
I want it to work, but to me it feels like throwing money at a problem without solving any of it.


For migrating existing applications to the cloud, I agree. That can be the case. But for new projects the initial input is much, much less than getting new hardware set up so I don't think that's the case there.

There are already several government projects running in the cloud and I'm hoping it's cheaper to run them there than with owned hardware but I haven't seen numbers either way.
Post #1168081
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 10:30 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, June 3, 2014 8:16 AM
Points: 295, Visits: 1,011
cfradenburg (8/31/2011)
Mattrick (8/31/2011)
I want it to work, but to me it feels like throwing money at a problem without solving any of it.


For migrating existing applications to the cloud, I agree. That can be the case. But for new projects the initial input is much, much less than getting new hardware set up so I don't think that's the case there.

There are already several government projects running in the cloud and I'm hoping it's cheaper to run them there than with owned hardware but I haven't seen numbers either way.


So you do not want to handle the hardware yourself, why not just rent power from a company with a vm environment for you to grow in?

Post #1168219
Posted Wednesday, August 31, 2011 11:24 AM
Forum Newbie

Forum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum NewbieForum Newbie

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 6:45 AM
Points: 6, Visits: 12
that is an important point - anything can be cracked- including those systems not in the cloud.
So are we more vulnerable with scattered disparate systems connected to one Internet, or with a few cloud systems connected to one Internet?
Post #1168236
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase 12»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse