Search Results

Search found 23347 results on 934 pages for 'salesforce service cloud'.

Page 46/934 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

  • Alternative to Amazon’s S3 service?

    - by Cory
    Just wondering if there is good alternative to Amazon's S3 service? I like S3 but the bandwidth cost is high. I looked at CouldFiles from Rackspace but the cost is even higher. I don't mind prepaying or having monthly payment in order to reduce the bandwidth cost greatly. Thank you for any help

    Read the article

  • About to go live: virtual dedicated server or cloud?

    - by morpheous
    I am about to launch my startup company, and we will be going live in a few weeks time. We have really tight budgetary constraints, since we are bootstrapping - and would prefer not to raise external capital. I cant use shared hosting because I need more control of the server machine (for technical reasons - e.g. using proprietary extensions to PHP, Apache and in the database layer as well) - but want to control costs and dont want to go fully private server route, until we have determined the market size etc. So the only real alternatives AFAIK is between virtual server and the cloud. At the moment, cloud services seem a bit "vague" to me. My understanding is that they allow an entity to outsource its IT infrastructure, which in my mind (at least), is indistinguishable from what a hosting provider provides (at least from a functional point of view) - I would like to seek some clarification on exactly what the difference between the two is. Back to my original question, my requirements are: IT infrastructure that can scale with growth Ability to have control of the machine (for e.g. to install our internally developed libraries etc) Backup software that is flexible and comprehensive enough (yet simple to use), that allows a (secured) backup strategy to be implemented. On this issue, I have always wondered where the actual backed up data was stored (since the physical machines are remote, and one cant get access to any actual tapes etc backed onto). I would also like some advice and recommendations in this area. Regarding data size, I am expecting the dataset to be increasing by a few megabytes of data (originally, say 10Mb, in about a years time, possibly 50Mb) every day. As an aside, I have decided to deploy on a Debian server (most of my additional libraries etc were compiled and built on a Debian machine). Mindful of all of the above, I would like some advice (and reason) as to which route to take. I would also like some advice on which backup software to use, from people who have walked a similar path.

    Read the article

  • Anyone have real world experience with Rackspace Cloud Sites at high scale?

    - by Allara
    I have a pure web service application layer using .NET. I was originally planning to use Amazon EC2, but rolling my own autoscaling procedures is a bit intimidating, and the scaling isn't very granular from a cost perspective. If the app is successful, we could be looking at relatively high scale (millions of requests per month). The app uses Amazon SimpleDB as the database layer. As a test, I have the app running successfully in Rackspace Cloud Sites. Performance seems to be equal to (if not better than) a standard EC2 instance, even with the added latency of the SimpleDB requests travelling to the Rackspace network. However, testing at this stage is at a very low scale. My question is this: has anyone had real-world experience running a high scale application on Rackspace Cloud Sites? Moreover, once you pass the "included" 10,000 compute cycles per month, does the overall cost seem to be lower than rolling lots of EC2 instances? My assumption would be that with completely smooth scaling (i.e. only adding compute resources as needed), the cost could be lower on average. However, their stated goal of calibrating 10,000 CCs as a single 1.2 Ghz CPU seems on average to be much more expensive than EC2. I like the idea of no-touch scaling, but is it too good to be true?

    Read the article

  • Provider claiming "all web servers in the cloud are automatically kept in sync" - should I be skeptical?

    - by RobMasters
    I'm no expert in cloud computing - I've spent a fair bit of time researching it and various providers but am yet to get any hands-on experience with it. From what I've read about AWS and auto-scaling EC2 instances though, it seems as though each instance should be completely decoupled from all other instances. i.e. If content is uploaded to the web server's local filesystem from a custom CMS backend then that content won't be available if subsequently requested from a different web server in the auto-scaling group. Is that right? I met with a representative of our existing hosting provider recently and he was claiming that it isn't a problem that our legacy CMS system is highly dependent on having a local filesystem. He said that all web servers, regardless of how many, would be kept as exact duplicates so I shouldn't notice any difference compared to our existing setup of a single dedicated server. This smells a little too much like bull fecal-matter to me...should I be skeptical about this? I'm a little worried because my (non-technical) boss who ultimately makes the decisions is all for signing up to this cloud solution because it won't require any extra work. I'm sure that they must at least be able to provide this, otherwise they wouldn't be attempting to sell it to us. But at what cost? It sounds as though each web server will always need to be checking the other web server(s) for new static content, which to me sounds like unwanted overhead that'll slow things down. I'd really appreciate it if somebody could clear this up to me. I'm all for switching to AWS and using S3+CloudFront for all static content, but that isn't looking very likely to happen at the moment.

    Read the article

  • Web service SSL handshake fails in production environment unless SSL debugging enabled

    - by JST
    Scenario: calling a client web service over SSL (https) with mutual SSL authentication. Different service endpoint URLs and certs (both keystore and truststore) for test vs. production environments. Both test and production environments run tomcat / JBoss clustered. Production environment has load balancing / BigIP, runs Blade and non-Blade machines. Truststore is set (using -Djavax.net.ssl.trustStore=value) at startup. Keystore is set using System.setProperty("javax.net.ssl.keyStore", "value") in Java code. Web service call made using Axis2. All works fine in test environment, but when we moved to production environment (6 servers), it appears certs are not being forwarded for the handshake. Here's what we've done: in test environment, handshake using test versions of certs has been working all along, with no ssl debugging enabled confirmed in test environment that handshake with client production endpoint succeeds (production certs, both ours and theirs, are fine) -- this was done using -Djavax.net.debug=handshake,ssl confirmed that the error condition occurs on all 6 production servers took one server out of the cluster, turned on ssl debugging for just that one (with a restart), hit it directly, handshake works! switched to a different server without the debugging turned on, handshake error condition occurs turned debugging on on that second server (with a restart), hit it directly, handshake works! From the evidence, it seems like somehow the debugging being enabled causes the certificates to be properly retrieved/conveyed, although that makes no sense! I wonder whether somehow the enabled debugging makes the system pay attention to the System.setProperty call, and ignore it otherwise. However, in local and test environments, handshake worked without debugging enabled. Do I maybe need to be setting keystore on server startup like I'm setting truststore? Have been avoiding that because the keystore will differ for each of our test environments (16 of them).

    Read the article

  • simple Java "service provider frameworks"?

    - by Jason S
    I refer to "service provider framework" as discussed in Chapter 2 of Effective Java, which seems like exactly the right way to handle a problem I am having, where I need to instantiate one of several classes at runtime, based on a String to select which service, and an Configuration object (essentially an XML snippet): But how do I get the individual service providers (e.g. a bunch of default providers + some custom providers) to register themselves? interface FooAlgorithm { /* methods particular to this class of algorithms */ } interface FooAlgorithmProvider { public FooAlgorithm getAlgorithm(Configuration c); } class FooAlgorithmRegistry { private FooAlgorithmRegistry() {} static private final Map<String, FooAlgorithmProvider> directory = new HashMap<String, FooAlgorithmProvider>(); static public FooAlgorithmProvider getProvider(String name) { return directory.get(serviceName); } static public boolean registerProvider(String name, FooAlgorithmProvider provider) { if (directory.containsKey(name)) return false; directory.put(name, provider); return true; } } e.g. if I write custom classes MyFooAlgorithm and MyFooAlgorithmProvider to implement FooAlgorithm, and I distribute them in a jar, is there any way to get registerProvider to be called automatically, or will my client programs that use the algorithm have to explicitly call FooAlgorithmRegistry.registerProvider() for each class they want to use?

    Read the article

  • Adding Service Reference to a WCF Service in Silverlight project defaulting to XmlSerialization for

    - by Shravan
    Hi, I am adding a WCF Service Reference in a Silverlight project, it is generating code with XmlSerialization attributes for DataMembers than SOAP Serialization. But, if the same WCF service reference is added in an ASP.Net project, is generating code with SOAP Serialization attribtues. Can anybody let me know what could be the cause for it, and how can I force reference to generate SOAP Serialization? XmlSerialization - [System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("System.Xml", "4.0.30319.1")] SOAP Serialization - [System.CodeDom.Compiler.GeneratedCodeAttribute("System.Runtime.Serialization", "4.0.0.0")] These are the attributes in the code generated for types, which I am looking into when saying it is using XmlSerialization/SOAP Serialization

    Read the article

  • Multiple SessionFactories in Windows Service with NHibernate

    - by Rob Taylor
    Hi all, I have a Webapp which connects to 2 DBs (one core, the other is a logging DB). I must now create a Windows service which will use the same business logic/Data access DLLs. However when I try to reference 2 session factories in the Service App and call the factory.GetCurrentSession() method, I get the error message "No session bound to current context". Does anyone have a suggestion about how this can be done? public class StaticSessionManager { public static readonly ISessionFactory SessionFactory; public static readonly ISessionFactory LoggingSessionFactory; static StaticSessionManager() { string fileName = System.Configuration.ConfigurationSettings.AppSettings["DefaultNHihbernateConfigFile"]; string executingPath = System.IO.Path.GetDirectoryName(System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().GetName().CodeBase); fileName = executingPath + "\\" + fileName; SessionFactory = cfg.Configure(fileName).BuildSessionFactory(); cfg = new Configuration(); fileName = System.Configuration.ConfigurationSettings.AppSettings["LoggingNHihbernateConfigFile"]; fileName = executingPath + "\\" + fileName; LoggingSessionFactory = cfg.Configure(fileName).BuildSessionFactory(); } } The configuration file has the setting: <property name="current_session_context_class">call</property> The service sets up the factories: private ISession _session = null; private ISession _loggingSession = null; private ISessionFactory _sessionFactory = StaticSessionManager.SessionFactory; private ISessionFactory _loggingSessionFactory = StaticSessionManager.LoggingSessionFactory; ... _sessionFactory = StaticSessionManager.SessionFactory; _loggingSessionFactory = StaticSessionManager.LoggingSessionFactory; _session = _sessionFactory.OpenSession(); NHibernate.Context.CurrentSessionContext.Bind(_session); _loggingSession = _loggingSessionFactory.OpenSession(); NHibernate.Context.CurrentSessionContext.Bind(_loggingSession); So finally, I try to call the correct factory by: ISession session = StaticSessionManager.SessionFactory.GetCurrentSession(); Can anyone suggest a better way to handle this? Thanks in advance! Rob

    Read the article

  • Windows Service Installation

    - by Goober
    Scenario I have a server, that has NO Visual Studio Installed. It literally has a normal command prompt and nothing installed yet. We don't want to install anything (except the .Net framework which we have already done). We just want to install a bunch of C# Windows Services that we have written. So far I have been installing and running the windows service on my local machine using a "setup and deploy" project that I built into the application, which I could then use to install the service locally. Question How can I install the service on the server? I imagine it can be done from the command prompt only, but what else do I need? - If anything? and where do I put the files that I want to install BEFORE I install them? I imagine I will have to compile the application on my local machine in Visual Studio, then copy it over to the server, and then run an install utility to install it on the server? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Unit testing, mocking - simple case: Service - Repository

    - by rafek
    Consider a following chunk of service: public class ProductService : IProductService { private IProductRepository _productRepository; // Some initlization stuff public Product GetProduct(int id) { try { return _productRepository.GetProduct(id); } catch (Exception e) { // log, wrap then throw } } } Let's consider a simple unit test: [Test] public void GetProduct_return_the_same_product_as_getProduct_on_productRepository() { var product = EntityGenerator.Product(); _productRepositoryMock.Setup(pr => pr.GetProduct(product.Id)).Returns(product); Product returnedProduct = _productService.GetProduct(product.Id); Assert.AreEqual(product, returnedProduct); _productRepositoryMock.VerifyAll(); } At first it seems that this test is ok. But let's change our service method a little bit: public Product GetProduct(int id) { try { var product = _productRepository.GetProduct(id); product.Owner = "totallyDifferentOwner"; return product; } catch (Exception e) { // log, wrap then throw } } How to rewrite a given test that it'd pass with the first service method and fail with a second one? How do you handle this kind of simple scenarios? HINT: A given test is bad coz product and returnedProduct is actually the same reference.

    Read the article

  • Problem while Building a Setup Project for a windows Service?

    - by vijay shiyani
    Hi guys, I have created windows service project in vs2008. I have created simple serivce project and implemented simple serivce sucessfully. Unlike other application i cannot run service exe file, so I had to first installed service using ServiceInstaller in my service project. Now i am building setup project for my service (MSI). In that setup project I am trying to add the output from my service project to my setup project by follwing below step 1. Right Click **Setup roject** in solution explorer and then click add and then click project output. 2.Now it open up *project output group dialog box* but now problem is this dialog box is empty and not allowing me to select service project. Now i dont know how to add the service projet to my setup project any help would be appriciated. Thank you guys.

    Read the article

  • Activity won't start a service

    - by Marko Cakic
    I m trying to start an IntentService from the main activity of y application and it won't start. I have the service in the manifest file. Here's the code: MainActivity public class Home extends Activity { private LinearLayout kontejner; IntentFilter intentFilter; @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.activity_home); kontejner = (LinearLayout) findViewById(R.id.kontejner); intentFilter = new IntentFilter(); startService(new Intent(getBaseContext(), HomeService.class)); } } Service: public class HomeService extends IntentService { public HomeService() { super("HomeService"); // TODO Auto-generated constructor stub } @Override protected void onHandleIntent(Intent intent) { Toast.makeText(getBaseContext(), "TEST", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show(); } } Manifest: <manifest xmlns:android="http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android" package="com.example.salefinder" android:versionCode="1" android:versionName="1.0" > <uses-sdk android:minSdkVersion="8" android:targetSdkVersion="15" /> <application android:icon="@drawable/ic_launcher" android:label="@string/app_name" android:theme="@style/AppTheme" > <activity android:name=".Home" android:label="@string/title_activity_home" > <intent-filter> <action android:name="android.intent.action.MAIN" /> <category android:name="android.intent.category.LAUNCHER" /> </intent-filter> </activity> <service android:name=".HomeService" /> </application> <uses-permission android:name="android.permission.INTERNET"/> </manifest> How can I make it work?

    Read the article

  • CloudCruiser Chargeback in the cloud

    - by llaszews
    Another company that does chargeback has just been pointed out to me: CloudCruiser There is interesting quote on this company's web site: "Accurate and transparent chargeback is a key requirement in this age of cloud computing. By 2015, we forecast more than 50% of the Global 2000 will charge back most IT costs using service-based pricing, up from less than 10% today. New integrated tools will be needed to implement IT service-based chargeback." - Jay Pultz, Vice President and Distinguished Analyst, Gartner

    Read the article

  • Framework/service for hosting and managing files

    - by Peteris Caune
    Hi, in a webapp I'm building there is a planned side feature of supporting product illustrations and manuals (so pictures and PDFs), possibly arranged in galleries. As I'd rather not implement from scratch all of the uploading, managing and serving of this content, I'm looking for existing solutions which I could integrate. For example, I'm considering Flickr--users of webapp specify their Flickr username and then use some naming convention to link objects in my webapp with pictures uploaded in their Flickr account. Very little code to write from my side, maybe just some API calls that proxy Flickr APIs, since Flickr would handle picture uploading, organizing them in sets, storing them in cloud and serving them in various sizes etc. One drawback here is that either all of the the pictures are public or I have to deal with interactive Flickr authorization. Also not sure if Flickr would be happy being used in such manner. What other online services or libraries/frameworks I should look at? My webapp is written in Python/Pylons, so Python libraries would be preferred. I'm already using some of Amazon infrastructure, so frontends to Amazon S3 would be cool. For online services, RESTful API would be nice.

    Read the article

  • Taking the Plunge - or Dipping Your Toe - into the Fluffy IAM Cloud by Paul Dhanjal (Simeio Solutions)

    - by Greg Jensen
    In our last three posts, we’ve examined the revolution that’s occurring today in identity and access management (IAM). We looked at the business drivers behind the growth of cloud-based IAM, the shortcomings of the old, last-century IAM models, and the new opportunities that federation, identity hubs and other new cloud capabilities can provide by changing the way you interact with everyone who does business with you. In this, our final post in the series, we’ll cover the key things you, the enterprise architect, should keep in mind when considering moving IAM to the cloud. Invariably, what starts the consideration process is a burning business need: a compliance requirement, security vulnerability or belt-tightening edict. Many on the business side view IAM as the “silver bullet” – and for good reason. You can almost always devise a solution using some aspect of IAM. The most critical question to ask first when using IAM to address the business need is, simply: is my solution complete? Typically, “business” is not focused on the big picture. Understandably, they’re focused instead on the need at hand: Can we be HIPAA compliant in 6 months? Can we tighten our new hire, employee transfer and termination processes? What can we do to prevent another password breach? Can we reduce our service center costs by the end of next quarter? The business may not be focused on the complete set of services offered by IAM but rather a single aspect or two. But it is the job – indeed the duty – of the enterprise architect to ensure that all aspects are being met. It’s like remodeling a house but failing to consider the impact on the foundation, the furnace or the zoning or setback requirements. While the homeowners may not be thinking of such things, the architect, of course, must. At Simeio Solutions, the way we ensure that all aspects are being taken into account – to expose any gaps or weaknesses – is to assess our client’s IAM capabilities against a five-step maturity model ranging from “ad hoc” to “optimized.” The model we use is similar to Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) developed by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University. It’s based upon some simple criteria, which can provide a visual representation of how well our clients fair when evaluated against four core categories: ·         Program Governance ·         Access Management (e.g., Single Sign-On) ·         Identity and Access Governance (e.g., Identity Intelligence) ·         Enterprise Security (e.g., DLP and SIEM) Often our clients believe they have a solution with all the bases covered, but the model exposes the gaps or weaknesses. The gaps are ideal opportunities for the cloud to enter into the conversation. The complete process is straightforward: 1.    Look at the big picture, not just the immediate need – what is our roadmap and how does this solution fit? 2.    Determine where you stand with respect to the four core areas – what are the gaps? 3.    Decide how to cover the gaps – what role can the cloud play? Returning to our home remodeling analogy, at some point, if gaps or weaknesses are discovered when evaluating the complete impact of the proposed remodel – if the existing foundation wouldn’t support the new addition, for example – the owners need to decide if it’s time to move to a new house instead of trying to remodel the old one. However, with IAM it’s not an either-or proposition – i.e., either move to the cloud or fix the existing infrastructure. It’s possible to use new cloud technologies just to cover the gaps. Many of our clients start their migration to the cloud this way, dipping in their toe instead of taking the plunge all at once. Because our cloud services offering is based on the Oracle Identity and Access Management Suite, we can offer a tremendous amount of flexibility in this regard. The Oracle platform is not a collection of point solutions, but rather a complete, integrated, best-of-breed suite. Yet it’s not an all-or-nothing proposition. You can choose just the features and capabilities you need using a pay-as-you-go model, incrementally turning on and off services as needed. Better still, all the other capabilities are there, at the ready, whenever you need them. Spooling up these cloud-only services takes just a fraction of the time it would take a typical organization to deploy internally. SLAs in the cloud may be higher than on premise, too. And by using a suite of software that’s complete and integrated, you can dramatically lower cost and complexity. If your in-house solution cannot be migrated to the cloud, you might consider using hardware appliances such as Simeio’s Cloud Interceptor to extend your enterprise out into the network. You might also consider using Expert Managed Services. Cost is usually the key factor – not just development costs but also operational sustainment costs. Talent or resourcing issues often come into play when thinking about sustaining a program. Expert Managed Services such as those we offer at Simeio can address those concerns head on. In a cloud offering, identity and access services lend to the new paradigms described in my previous posts. Most importantly, it allows us all to focus on what we're meant to do – provide value, lower costs and increase security to our respective organizations. It’s that magic “silver bullet” that business knew you had all along. If you’d like to talk more, you can find us at simeiosolutions.com.

    Read the article

  • Way to auto resize photos before uploaded to cloud service?

    - by AndroidHustle
    I love using auto syncing services to have my photos taken with my smartphone stored on a cloud storage service. One problem though is that the photos are uploaded in high resolution and takes up a lot of space on the drive. I wonder if any one knows of a service/strategy to have the auto uploaded photo resized to have it occupy less space when auto stored? That is, without me having to take the photos with lesser quality, I still want photos taken with the highest quality since I may take a photo I really like.

    Read the article

  • How to enable systemd instantiated service with puppet?

    - by Richard Pena
    I've got the following puppet service: service { "getty@ttyUSB0.service": provider => systemd, ensure => running, enable => true, } When I try to apply this configuration on my client, it throws the following error: err: /Stage[main]//Node[puppetclient]/Service[[email protected]]/enable: change from false to true failed: Could not enable [email protected]: The service is running fine and I can make sure it's started on system boot by adding a symlink to getty.target.wants: ln -s /lib/systemd/system/getty@.service /etc/systemd/system/getty.target.wants/getty@ttyUSB0.service Of source, I could go ahead and remove "enable = true" from the service definition and include a the symlink manually in the puppet configuration, but shouldn't puppet take care of this? Am I doing something terribly wrong?

    Read the article

  • Doubts about several best practices for rest api + service layer

    - by TheBeefMightBeTough
    I'm going to be starting a project soon that exposes a restful api for business intelligence. It may not be limited to a restful api, so I plan to delegate requests to a service layer that then coordinates multiple domain objects (each of which have business logic local to the object). The api will likely have many calls as it is a long-term project. While thinking about the design, I recalled a few best practices. 1) Use command objects at the controller layer (I'm using Spring MVC). 2) Use DTOs at the service layer. 3) Validate in both the controller and service layer, though for different reasons. I have my doubts about these recommendations. 1) Using command objects adds a lot of extra single-purpose classes (potentially one per request). What exactly is the benefit? Annotation based validation can be done using this approach, sure. What if I have two requests that take the same parameters, but have different validation requirements? I would have to have two different classes with exactly the same members but different annotations? Bleh. 2) I have heard that using DTOs is preferable to parameters because it makes for more maintainable code down the road (say, e.g., requirements change and the service parameters need to be altered). I don't quite understand this. Shouldn't an api be more-or-less set in stone? I would understand that in the early phases of a project (or, especially, an entire company) the domain itself will not be well understood, and thus core domain objects may change along with the apis that manipulate these objects. At this point however the number of api methods should be small and their dependents few, so changes to the methods could easily be tolerated from a maintainability standpoint. In a large api with many methods and a substantial domain model, I would think having a DTO for potentially each domain object would become unwieldy. Am I misunderstanding something here? 3) I see validation in the controller and service layer as redundant in most cases. Why would I validate that parameters are not null and are in general well formed in the controller if the service is going to do exactly the same (and more). Couldn't I just do all the validation in the service and throw a runtime exception with a list of bad parameters then catch that in the controller to make the error messages more presentable? Better yet, couldn't I just make the error messages user-friendly in the service and let the exception trickle up to a global handler (ControllerAdvice in spring, for example)? Is there something wrong with either of these approaches? (I do see a use case for controller validation if the input does not map one-to-one with the service input, but since the controllers are for a rest api and not forms, the api parameters will probably map directly to service parameters.) I do also have a question about unchecked vs checked exceptions. Namely, I'm not really sure why I'd ever want to use a checked exception. Every time I have seen them used they just get wrapped into general exceptions (DomainException, SystemException, ApplicationException, w/e) to reduce the signature length of methods, or devs catch Exception rather than dealing with the App1Exception, App2Exception, Sys1Exception, Sys2Exception. I don't see how either of these practices is very useful. Why not just use unchecked exceptions always and catch the ones you actually do care about? You could just document what unchecked exceptions the method throws.

    Read the article

  • High Availability for IaaS, PaaS and SaaS in the Cloud

    - by BuckWoody
    Outages, natural disasters and unforeseen events have proved that even in a distributed architecture, you need to plan for High Availability (HA). In this entry I'll explain a few considerations for HA within Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS), Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). In a separate post I'll talk more about Disaster Recovery (DR), since each paradigm has a different way to handle that. Planning for HA in IaaS IaaS involves Virtual Machines - so in effect, an HA strategy here takes on many of the same characteristics as it would on-premises. The primary difference is that the vendor controls the hardware, so you need to verify what they do for things like local redundancy and so on from the hardware perspective. As far as what you can control and plan for, the primary factors fall into three areas: multiple instances, geographical dispersion and task-switching. In almost every cloud vendor I've studied, to ensure your application will be protected by any level of HA, you need to have at least two of the Instances (VM's) running. This makes sense, but you might assume that the vendor just takes care of that for you - they don't. If a single VM goes down (for whatever reason) then the access to it is lost. Depending on multiple factors, you might be able to recover the data, but you should assume that you can't. You should keep a sync to another location (perhaps the vendor's storage system in another geographic datacenter or to a local location) to ensure you can continue to serve your clients. You'll also need to host the same VM's in another geographical location. Everything from a vendor outage to a network path problem could prevent your users from reaching the system, so you need to have multiple locations to handle this. This means that you'll have to figure out how to manage state between the geo's. If the system goes down in the middle of a transaction, you need to figure out what part of the process the system was in, and then re-create or transfer that state to the second set of systems. If you didn't write the software yourself, this is non-trivial. You'll also need a manual or automatic process to detect the failure and re-route the traffic to your secondary location. You could flip a DNS entry (if your application can tolerate that) or invoke another process to alias the first system to the second, such as load-balancing and so on. There are many options, but all of them involve coding the state into the application layer. If you've simply moved a state-ful application to VM's, you may not be able to easily implement an HA solution. Planning for HA in PaaS Implementing HA in PaaS is a bit simpler, since it's built on the concept of stateless applications deployment. Once again, you need at least two copies of each element in the solution (web roles, worker roles, etc.) to remain available in a single datacenter. Also, you need to deploy the application again in a separate geo, but the advantage here is that you could work out a "shared storage" model such that state is auto-balanced across the world. In fact, you don't have to maintain a "DR" site, the alternate location can be live and serving clients, and only take on extra load if the other site is not available. In Windows Azure, you can use the Traffic Manager service top route the requests as a type of auto balancer. Even with these benefits, I recommend a second backup of storage in another geographic location. Storage is inexpensive; and that second copy can be used for not only HA but DR. Planning for HA in SaaS In Software-as-a-Service (such as Office 365, or Hadoop in Windows Azure) You have far less control over the HA solution, although you still maintain the responsibility to ensure you have it. Since each SaaS is different, check with the vendor on the solution for HA - and make sure you understand what they do and what you are responsible for. They may have no HA for that solution, or pin it to a particular geo, or perhaps they have a massive HA built in with automatic load balancing (which is often the case).   All of these options (with the exception of SaaS) involve higher costs for the design. Do not sacrifice reliability for cost - that will always cost you more in the end. Build in the redundancy and HA at the very outset of the project - if you try to tack it on later in the process the business will push back and potentially not implement HA. References: http://www.bing.com/search?q=windows+azure+High+Availability  (each type of implementation is different, so I'm routing you to a search on the topic - look for the "Patterns and Practices" results for the area in Azure you're interested in)

    Read the article

  • Which cloud service is best?? can you order it??

    - by mathew
    Hi there are many cloud services out there but famous are mentioned below...can any one tell me which one is first,second,third etc....in terms of money,performance and reliability.. 1) Amazon 2) Rackspace 3) Softlayer 4) Vps.net I dont know other actually I am only looking for Linux services .... Mathew

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >