I have a general question regarding hosting an application in the cloud such as such as AWS, or Azure.
Does it make senses to have my application servers, BDs in the cloud while having the Web servers in our local non-cloud data center? The reason I am asking is because of some special requirements is easier to have our Web servers in our in-house datacenter rather having it in the cloud.
so I am looking for any issues like slowness and etc with this approach.
Thanks
What you are suggesting really makes no sense.
There are hybrid architectures, but for most of these implementations you have the web / application servers in the cloud, and are accessing a database still in your non-cloud data center.
Most cloud providers do web serving really, really well: load balancing, autoscaling, monitoring, and content distribution networks all tied together with automation mean that it is highly doubtful that you can do it better in-house.
Related
I am designing the architecture for software. I am in process of creating micro services related to big component.
Either i can create micro service on different server or on same server. Is it good to create micro service component on same server instance or i can create different micro-services on diffrent server.
I think its good too have different server for bigger components, obviously it will increase the cost.
Can any one please let me know your thoughts on this.
Thanks
I recommend a combined approach; Services are containerized in a shared server, this provides some level of isolation between the services. While using multiple servers for increasing availability and horizontally scaling.
From my experience this achieves the lowest cost and highest availability.
A good container orchestration system like Kubernetes abstracts this and combines all servers in a one virtual cluster, which simplifies the management of the whole infrastructure. In addition it provides some useful services that benefits this type of architecture, like managing the lifecycle of individual services, load balancing and moving services between nodes in case of hardware failure.
I'm studying web and confused about the concepts of Django, Apache, and AWS.
I have an experience of developing web backend with Django and AWS.
Django handled the interactions between web browser and server.
AWS enabled the clients to share the same server and data.
But, what is Apache? This wasn't considered during the development.
According to my research, Apache is web server application.
But, I can't tell the exact difference of it with AWS.
Does AWS include Apache?
Please help me make sure what Apache is. Thanks :)
Django
Django itself is web framework used for developing web applications based on python. Which is used for making development proccess more simple and easy. It provides various built in things such as Django ORM, Forms, Security, Authentication, Admin and many third party packages that are available on django packages. Which enables you to develop your application rapidly.
AWS
AWS stands for amazon web services which provides cloud applications such as computation units, cloud storage, databases, cache servers and so on. It provides computation units to deploy your web apps on. i.e EC2 intances (Elastic compute cloud). As well as it provides database such as RDS (Amazon relational database) along with S3 buckets (Amazon storage) for storing media files and serving static ones.
Apache
Apache is web server which is used to deploy web applications on production. You can setup Apache web server on you premises or let you setup in cloud platform such as Amazon EC2 instances. By defalt Django or any other web apps run on single thread which do not give better performance. Apchae web server enables you to run multiple threads/ workers to handle parallel request simultaneously.
By putting all together You can develop you application using Django framework. Than choose AWS for deployment steps. i.e EC2 instance for Apache web server setup, RDS or any other database instance and S3 bucket for storage option.
Please note that this setup may be vary upon your requirements
These are two completely different services/software. AWS (Amazon Web Services) is a cloud platform where you run applications and softwares.
Apache on the other hand is a SOFTWARE that run on servers. So, essentially you can run Apache on AWS.
That is the basic idea. AWS is a platform and Apache can run on top of AWS.
The stated goal for Django is to offer a web application framework that enables quick development and minimal code.That goal can be accomplished with a simple single-threaded web server that simply facilitates development and testing.
The goal of Apache httpd, Nginx, IIS, etc. on the other hand is to offer exceptionally scalable and performant web servers. These applications are highly configurable as all applications differ and there's no one size fits all. They also require different expertise to design, implement and maintain.
Big banks follow Service Oriented Architecture for their functioning.
They may have more that 50 services so do they run individual services as separate server or they group services ?
Can anyone explain this in detail ?
According to SOA, each service should be able to serve the service independently and hence could be hosted on a separate server.
But all this servers should communicate between each other internally,so the system as a whole is aware of the services offered by each server and the outside world can hit a single endpoint while requesting a service. Internally a routing module will identify the server which offers the particular service and serve it.
It could be also possible that there could be more than one server serving the same request if the load expected is high.
Also the term server could mean a runtime, something like a JVM if the service is Java based or it could be a machine too.
according to wiki:
Every computer can run any number of services, and each service is
built in a way that ensures that the service can exchange information
with any other service in the network without human interaction and
without the need to make changes to the underlying program itself.
Normally similar nature services or services communicating with same code base or DB server or another application server etc are grouped together. While a high volume service or long running service could be served separately to speed up the system.
The whole purpose of Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) is to have flexibility for each module( exposed as service) to have it's freedom of deployment, implementation an expansion with least affecting other modules. So all these services either they could be hosted on single server with different ports or they could be on different server.
Usually at big banks, there would be a team owning each service.Each service is deployed on different server. In fact each service may be deployed on many servers for Scalability and fault tolerance.
Usually the services are hosted by an Enterprise Service Bus, a component which publishes the services to all information systems of the organization and also to the external B2B customers (via B2B gateway).
The services hosted on ESB may utilize services provided by backend systems. These services of backend system are considered as private and are only consumed via ESB. This approach eliminates the spaghetti mess which comes if everybody integrates with anybody.
Most of ESB systems I have come accross were high available solutions with a HA database, a cluster of application servers and a load balancer, all together creating a platform to ensure stability and performance of the services.
The number of services in an enterprise can be very large, I have been involved in projects with hundreds of services, largest corporations can run thousands of services.
I recommend to check wikipedia for more about ESB.
I’m noob with AWS services, I develop web application with Ruby on Rails, so, I’ll like to know what could be the best way or the right one to deploy and manage web application with AWS.
Right now there are bunch of services of AWS for handle web apps, but I’m not sure which service to use, OpsWork, EC2 (setup the entire server), Elastic Beanstalk or EC2 Containers and so on…
Well, I have 3 small apps from diferentes clients and I’m looking the right way to have them on one instance or couples of instances, right know i’m with OpsWorks, I have 3 stack, one for each web app, I want to know if I can deploy and manage those apps in one stack and 2 instance of OpsWorks or there are better way or other services as IaaS or PaaS solutions?. So i’m looking for advise or orientation for use AWS service for those kind of thing.
This question is rather vague and the answer depends on the needs of your app, but I'll give my 2 cents regardless. I have several rails apps hosted on EC2 instances running Ubuntu, NGINX, and Phusion Passenger. The apps that receive a decent amount of traffic and require consistent performance/availability are cloned across multiple EC2 instances (in multiple zones) and have traffic managed by Elastic Load Balancers (ELBs). The app databases are served through amazon's RDS services. Domain registration and nameservers are set up through AWS Route 53. Static assets are served from AWS S3.
This type of architecture certainly has a price tag on it and isn't the only way to do it. My experience has been that all of my older Rails apps have survived over a year with 100% uptime and rarely have moments of slowness been the fault of AWS as opposed to my own code or 3rd-party software.
Hope this helps; feel free to ask questions.
need to make a bunch (20+) of services (usually single purpose services - such as user management - with multiple methods).
is it better for each service to be on its own port / in its own project in visual studio OR do them all at once on a single port in a single project?
what is the best from scaling point of view? also if they are all deployed on a single machine, performance wise is there a difference between the two approaches?
somehow it makes sense to have them separate, so if for example, one of the services sees significantly higher use it can be scaled alone on multiple machines, do you agree?
When it comes to web services the physical TCP/IP port is really not important, you should shoot for the standard HTTP port (80) and make sure you have adequate load balancing on the web server for the expected user load.
Performance on a server gets degraded when resources (memory or processing power) are on high demand, having your services on different ports won't change this situation, if your user load exceeds the resources available on just one server, you'll need to look into creating a server farm or deploying on a cloud service that can scale to you needs (Like Amazon EC2 or Microsoft Azure).
The project segmentation depends on functionality, services with similar functionality and that interact with related backend resources could be grouped together on the same projects, for scaling purposes, but there's no hard rule on how to segment your services on projects, is all common sense and trying to group similar functionalities.