Replication to the cloud?

Question

Post reply

Replication to the cloud?

Eric Mamet

SSChampion

Points: 11720
More actions
August 8, 2014 at 4:46 am

#297865

We have a little problem where connectivity to our corporate network is very bad in some parts of the world.
We would like to expose one of our databases (read-only) from the cloud because we think we would achieve better performance that way.
The database is not very big (tens of GBs).
I understand replication is not supported by Windows Azure or AWS (Amazon Web Services).
Has anyone any idea how to achieve our goal?
Thanks
Eric
June 18, 2020 at 8:49 am

This was removed by the editor as SPAM
February 27, 2021 at 7:52 am

This was removed by the editor as SPAM

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Eric Mamet SSChampion Points: 11720 More actions · Answer 1

The more I look at this, the more I think the smartest answer might be to move completely our database to the cloud.

Then I would not need replication... :satisfied: but I don't know if we'd be authorised to do that...

Summer90 SSC-Dedicated Points: 32891 More actions · Answer 2

Better get your legal dept involved. The decision for us to put anything in the cloud is waiting on our Legal Dept to give us the OK to do so.

gracechristopher06 Old Hand Points: 305 More actions · Answer 3

The AWS MySQL RDS instances should be contained in a VPC. This provides some network security which you will need in place to provide any publicly consumed service.

I’m not very familiar with Azure but as long as you can connect Azure’s VPC with your AWS VPC over VPN you will have the network connectivity in place but all of that inter-connectivity will drastically increase your costs. This will defeat most advantages you gain from best-in-class pricing options by placing some of your resources in Azure.

Even without a VPN connecting your two VPCs the data transfer between Azure and AWS will add costs at both ends. This is not just performance but a pricing issue.

Now let’s talk about high availability. Within AWS you can leverage a replicated read-only database for your read operations and it will exist in another availability zone (different data center).

Using both platforms isn’t a bad idea for high availability but you are building dependence on Azure back to AWS and that is a bad idea. What happens when either platform has an outage? Essentially you’ve more than doubled (because of the inter-connectivity issues) your chance for failures which will happen.

Now lastly let’s find that cloud-tech guy who runs this. I’m an AWS guy. I can learn Azure pretty quickly but I keep up with AWS and it would be a huge challenge to keep up with Azure and AWS at the level of familiarity and competence I can maintain with just AWS. You might be able to take this on by yourself but it will surely complicate the solution you deliver as BOTH systems are inter-connected.

So you’ve added latency, increased risk, increased costs, harder to support and complicated your management of your cloud solution.

If you were going MySQL on AWS and MS-SQL on Azure and building two front ends with two back ends that provided high availability that would be a benefit. You have added no benefits and only additional costs. There is no additional value added so it’s a terrible idea.