When is colocation the right choice?
-
@scottalanmiller said in When is colocation the right choice?:
Rack pricing (aka 1/4 rack, 1/3 rack, 1/2 rack, Full Rack) is typically very high compared to "Per U" pricing. You'd be amazed how much you can save.
Hit up @colocationamerica for pricing details. They have some really competitive rates.Yet, even @colocationamerica does not offer "per u" pricing in very many places. It is much more common to get fractional rack space.
-
@scottalanmiller said in When is colocation the right choice?:
@pete-s said in When is colocation the right choice?:
The last few posts goes in the direction I'm planning to go myself. And that is to rent 1/4 rack in a datacenter and colocate a couple of servers there. The servers I'm going to use are part refurbished, part new but still has a couple of years worth of life in them. Given the price of just CPU & memory today, refurbished is very good value for money. You could obviously get more cores and higher density with new machines but even if a few U's are wasted, the difference in money is huge.
In colocation, value tends to lean heavily towards investing in rack density. Virtualization drove the move to colocation heavily. You want big CPUs, and loads of RAM. If you can squeeze into 1U or maybe 2U, it's worth a bit of extra money thrown at the hardware to keep yourself from spilling over to an extra box.
Rack pricing (aka 1/4 rack, 1/3 rack, 1/2 rack, Full Rack) is typically very high compared to "Per U" pricing. You'd be amazed how much you can save.
Hit up @colocationamerica for pricing details. They have some really competitive rates.
I'm in Europe so doesn't make sense to use US datacenters. But the quotes I have puts three 1U servers at the same price as 1/4 rack.
-
@pete-s said in When is colocation the right choice?:
@scottalanmiller said in When is colocation the right choice?:
@pete-s said in When is colocation the right choice?:
The last few posts goes in the direction I'm planning to go myself. And that is to rent 1/4 rack in a datacenter and colocate a couple of servers there. The servers I'm going to use are part refurbished, part new but still has a couple of years worth of life in them. Given the price of just CPU & memory today, refurbished is very good value for money. You could obviously get more cores and higher density with new machines but even if a few U's are wasted, the difference in money is huge.
In colocation, value tends to lean heavily towards investing in rack density. Virtualization drove the move to colocation heavily. You want big CPUs, and loads of RAM. If you can squeeze into 1U or maybe 2U, it's worth a bit of extra money thrown at the hardware to keep yourself from spilling over to an extra box.
Rack pricing (aka 1/4 rack, 1/3 rack, 1/2 rack, Full Rack) is typically very high compared to "Per U" pricing. You'd be amazed how much you can save.
Hit up @colocationamerica for pricing details. They have some really competitive rates.
I'm in Europe so doesn't make sense to use US datacenters. But the quotes I have puts three 1U servers at the same price as 1/4 rack.
Sounds right to me.
-
@jaredbusch said in When is colocation the right choice?:
@scottalanmiller said in When is colocation the right choice?:
Rack pricing (aka 1/4 rack, 1/3 rack, 1/2 rack, Full Rack) is typically very high compared to "Per U" pricing. You'd be amazed how much you can save.
Hit up @colocationamerica for pricing details. They have some really competitive rates.Yet, even @colocationamerica does not offer "per u" pricing in very many places. It is much more common to get fractional rack space.
Both coasts, though. Enough places for most people.
-
@pete-s said in When is colocation the right choice?:
@scottalanmiller said in When is colocation the right choice?:
@pete-s said in When is colocation the right choice?:
The last few posts goes in the direction I'm planning to go myself. And that is to rent 1/4 rack in a datacenter and colocate a couple of servers there. The servers I'm going to use are part refurbished, part new but still has a couple of years worth of life in them. Given the price of just CPU & memory today, refurbished is very good value for money. You could obviously get more cores and higher density with new machines but even if a few U's are wasted, the difference in money is huge.
In colocation, value tends to lean heavily towards investing in rack density. Virtualization drove the move to colocation heavily. You want big CPUs, and loads of RAM. If you can squeeze into 1U or maybe 2U, it's worth a bit of extra money thrown at the hardware to keep yourself from spilling over to an extra box.
Rack pricing (aka 1/4 rack, 1/3 rack, 1/2 rack, Full Rack) is typically very high compared to "Per U" pricing. You'd be amazed how much you can save.
Hit up @colocationamerica for pricing details. They have some really competitive rates.
I'm in Europe so doesn't make sense to use US datacenters. But the quotes I have puts three 1U servers at the same price as 1/4 rack.
Wow, the difference here is usually huge. Like $50 - $100 for a 1U or 2U, and several hundred for quarter racks.
-
@scottalanmiller said in When is colocation the right choice?:
I'm in Europe so doesn't make sense to use US datacenters. But the quotes I have puts three 1U servers at the same price as 1/4 rack.
Wow, the difference here is usually huge. Like $50 - $100 for a 1U or 2U, and several hundred for quarter racks.
Yes, I guess the choice would depend a lot on the pricing.
I also have specific 2U servers in mind which would make it lower cost with a 1/4 rack already at two servers.
Each refurb server will have 128GB RAM on 20 cores, expandable to 256GB RAM on 40 cores. I haven't run benchmarks on it but looking at geekbench, machines with the same cpu have a score of around 3000 for a single core. So performance should be similar to most cloud providers that are not running latest gen servers. Hopefully the balance of physical cores and RAM will turn out fine, 6.4GB/pCPU. Of course I could allocate resources as I want and add another server if need be.
