Reply to post: Re: It's also more expensive

Cattle that fail, not pets that purr – the future of servers

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: It's also more expensive

Consistent in terms of a pattern, but not in terms of actual usage (high activity for short periods followed by lengthy idleness isn't pretty steady), which becomes a factor in the figures since idle iron costs but doesn't return. But that example creates a dilemma. As a financial institution, its data would be considered highly confidential and under legal restraints: a significant reason you have to stick with pets, yet the job isn't run for very long (10% or less of total uptime), making it difficult to justify pets (lots of upkeep, little actual work for the time period). It's something like this that calls for a third solution: a rented physical machine that can be sited and a physical drive plugged in to run the job, then unplugged and the machine returned without any storage when the job's done. Use it only when you need it, the data stays with you on-site so confidentiality is kept and so on.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon