Is there any difference for billing if application on AWS is web java application that communicate with outside world through web service or servlet or is i.e console java application with opened socket server and someone outside is connecting to it?
Assuming that all things are equal then the short answer is: No - there is no difference.
AWS bills you based on resource usage, so a web service, servlet or console application will still require an EC2 instance to run on. Assuming they can all run on a given instance type (e.g. micro) then you'll be billed at the hourly rate of the EC2 instance type.
If you wanted to get pedantic, then the solution that would send the least amount of data out would be the cheapest. When considering this remember that it doesn't matter if you connect in, or it connects to you, what matters is the number of bytes transmitted out from your instance. So a solution that support compression of the transmitted data would be better than a solution that didn't.
Related
I think chrome to cloud run is doing http/2 from what I am reading and looking at developer tools, it shows things as http/2 headers(at least I don't think chrome displays it in http/2 header format if it is http1, but I can't tell as I would think this website is http1 but I see http/2 request headers in chrome's dev tools -> https://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/Performance/microscape/).
Anyways, I am wondering for cloud run if I loop and keep calling a json endpoint to delivery pieces of a file to cloud storage, will it stay connected to the same instance the entire time such that my upload will work with the ByteReader in the server. In this way, I can load large files as long as it loads within the cloud run timeout window.
Does anyone know if this will work or will cloud run see each json request form chrome hit the firewall and the firewall might round robin it among cloud run instances?
Anyways, I am wondering for cloud run if I loop and keep calling a
JSON endpoint to deliver pieces of a file to cloud storage, will it
stay connected to the same instance the entire time ...
The answer sometimes it will and sometimes it will not. Do not design something that depends on that answer.
What you are looking for is often termed sticky sessions or session affinity.
Google Cloud Run is designed as a stateless service.
Google Cloud Run automatically scales container instances and load balances every request. Cloud Run does not offer any session stickiness between requests.
Google Cloud Run: About sticky sessions (session affinity)
Cloud Run offer bidirectional streaming and websocket support. The timeout is still limited to 1 hour, but it's a suitable connection to stream your large file into the same instance (don't crash the instance memory size, remember that even the file that you store take space in memory, because it's a stateless service)
A bad solution is to set a max instance to 1. It's a bad solution, because it's not scalable and, even if most of the time, you will have only one instance, sometime Cloud Run service can provision 2 or more instances and only guaranty you that only one is used at the same time.
I have a very basic idea on servers. So far I have only worked with few Ubuntu VPS server which I can easily maintain, install a database, upload my code and run my projects. And to save static data like image/video I use local SSD storage of my server.
Now I got some projects where AWS is required to use. In the beginning, I thought it would be very similar to my normal Ubuntu based VPS server. But while I start researching/reading articles also their own docs I find out it has lots more cool features for server and at the same, it's little complicated for a beginner. I would be really glad if someone give his time and reply on these questions of mine to clear concept about AWS of mine and people like me
As my plan is to use one EC2 instance to run my project. But I can see many experts suggest to use Elastic Beanstalk and create EC2 instance inside that. While I can directly run my project with EC2 without taking help from Elastic Beanstalk. So why it's better / what other help do it(Elastic Beanstalk) provide?
When I am checking the pricing of EC2(On-demand > Linux Unix) it says ECU as Variable. What does that mean? And where does ECU work
Instance Storage (GB) as EBS only. Does that mean I can't have any storage with my server I must buy separately? But in my previous VPS server, I use to get fewer storages with my server. Because storage is required if I want to install new software like MySQL/Redis/Python each of them requires local storage. Also if I want to upload my code or few static images it requires storage.
Like storage do I also need to buy other instances for a database? Like if I want to use PostgreSQL as my database do I need to buy AWS RDS or I can install that inside my Linux system?
Lastly, what are the main differences of my normal VPS Linux server and in AWS EC2 Linux server?
Thanks in advance for giving time :)
Let me try to answer your questions inline.
As my plan is to use one EC2 instance to run my project. But I can
see many experts suggest to use Elastic Beanstalk and create EC2
instance inside that. While I can directly run my project with EC2
without taking help from Elastic Beanstalk. So why it's better /
what other help do it(Elastic Beanstalk) provide?
If you are planning to use a single server and a database going with EC2 and RDS would be straightforward. However, if you are planning to set up, autoscaling (automatically increasing the number of servers only when load increases and return back to one server), load balancing and DevOps support, you need to set them up which requires more knowledge on AWS platform. AWS Elastic Beanstalk does these for you automatically, also by giving you the options to select the technology of your application and simply upload the code.
When I am checking the pricing of EC2(On-demand > Linux Unix) it says ECU as Variable. What does that mean? And where does ECU work
ECU is simply a rough figure to compare the processing across multiple EC2 classes that are having the different levels processing power.
Instance Storage (GB) as EBS only. Does that mean I can't have any storage with my server I must buy separately? But in my previous VPS server, I use to get fewer storages with my server. Because storage is required if I want to install new software like MySQL/Redis/Python each of them requires local storage. Also if I want to upload my code or few static images it requires storage.
EBS storage is reliable storage (With internal redundancy) that will last beyond your instance lifetime. Which means, you can upgrade the EC2 class and install software, or store files, which will remain in the EBS volume unless you delete it.
Since you are basically paying for the GBs, you can also create another EBS volume for static files and mount it to the EC2 instance if you want.
Like storage do I also need to buy other instances for a database? Like if I want to use PostgreSQL as my database do I need to buy AWS RDS or I can install that inside my Linux system?
It's not mandatory but recommended since you can even use a smaller instance for a web server and use another one for the DB. It's up to you. For example, the cost would be roughly similar if you use two small EC2 instances for a web server and DB server (Or use RDS) or use a single medium-size EC2 instance where both DB and web is running.
Lastly what are the main differences of my normal VPS Linux server and in AWS EC2 Linux server?
You will get more options in terms of selecting the hardware underneath since AWS provides different configuration options. In addition, EC2 instances are able to utilize the AWS ecosystem for Networking, Security, Load balancing & etc for better-optimized solution architectures in terms of reliability, security, performance & etc.
Q1) Beanstalk is a management application. AWS has several: CloudFormation, OpsWorks. Third party vendors have their own: Chef, Ansible, Terraform, etc. I really like Beanstalk and how it makes deploying code very easy for small sites (one command). I can scale up or scale down with a button push. I also use CloudFormation every day for just about everything.
Q2) ECU is a AWS Equivalent Compute Unit used to compare one instance with another. How does that translate to physical CPUs? Don't know as AWS does not publish its absolute meaning. Use is only to compare EC2 instances.
Q3) When you launch an EC2 instance, you will need storage. This is an additional cost (around $0.10 per GB per month). You will specify the size and type of storage (there are a number of types). There is also Instance Store Volumes. Stay away from these unless you really understand how to use them (they don't persist a shutdown so all data is lost). There are good use cases for Instance Store (AI, Big Data, Image processing), but a website is not one of them.
Q4) If your EC2 instance is big enough (2 GB of memory and larger), you can install PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc on your EC2 instance. Otherwise AWS has a number of database optios: DynamoDB, RDS, Aurora, etc.
Q5) Difficult to answer as each vendor offers its own set of features. EC2 instances are virtual machines. You have control over the raw power of that VM. Most VPS servers have management interfaces that EC2 does not. Usually EC2 is more expensive than VPS servers.
Watch a couple of AWS videos on YouTube. This will help you to understand AWS and why it is so successful in the cloud. Linux Academy, A Cloud Guru, etc. have very good training courses on AWS.
AWS Essentials: EC2 Basics
If you have further questions, open a new StackOverflow question per question. You will seldom get answers to long multi-question questions.
My scenario is mentioned below, please provide the solution.
I need to run 17 HTTP Rest API's for 30K users.
I will create 6 AWS instances (Slaves) for running 30K (6 Instances*5000 Users) users.
Each AWS instance (Slave) needs to handle 5K Users.
I will create 1 AWS instance (Master) for controlling 6 AWS slaves.
1) For Master AWS instance, what instance type and storage I need to use?
2) For Slave AWS instance, what instance type and storage I need to use?
3) The main objective is a Single AWS instance need to handle 5000Users (5k) users, for this what instance type and storage I need to use? This objective needs to solve for low cost (pricing)?
Full ELB DNS Name:
The answer is I don't know, this is something you need to find out how many users you will be able to simulate on this or that AWS instance as it depends on the nature of your test, what it is doing, response size, number of postprocessors/assertions, etc.
So I would recommend the following approach:
First of all make sure you are following recommendations from the 9 Easy Solutions for a JMeter Load Test “Out of Memory” Failure
Start with single AWS server, i.e. t2.large and single virtual user. Gradually increase the load at the same time monitor the AWS health (CPU,RAM, Disk, etc) using either Amazon CloudWatch or JMeter PerfMon Plugin. Once there will be a lack of the monitored metrics (i.e. CPU usage exceeds 90%) stop your test and mention the number of virtual users at this stage (you can use i.e. Active Threads Over Time listener for this)
Depending on the outcome either switch to other instance type (i.e. Compute Optimized if there is a lack of CPU or Memory Optimized if there is a lack of RAM) or go for higher spec instance of the same tier (i.e. t2.xlarge)
Once you get the number of users you can simulate on a single host you should be able to extrapolate it to other hosts.
JMeter master host doesn't need to be as powerful as slave machines, just make sure it has enough memory to handle incoming results.
I am about to launch an iOS app that will be communicating with my custom REST API. Right now I am running a single EC2 t2.micro instance running an Apache web server with MySQLi. Before I go ahead and launch it for the public, I want to hear what proper steps should be taken regarding the following.
Should I run two separate EC2 instances? One only for the web server and the other to handle only the database?
How should I approach setting up the database? Should I still use MySQLi or should I start using Amazon's RDS?
In relationship to number two, when the database and/or web server runs out of space, how is this issue handled so that it seamlessly adds space to allow the database/web server to continue growth? I also read something regarding auto-scale.
I will be expecting many requests per minute to my web server and want to take precaution.
The answer to these questions largely depends on the requirements of your application, your budget, and on what you decide to manage vs. what you'd prefer to allow AWS to manage. However, I'll answer these as best I can.
1) Yes. Separating the database from the web server (that is, 2 different EC2 instances) makes sense for a lot of reasons. This will allow you to tailor resources like memory, CPU, etc. to each layer of your application separately. You do not want your web and database competing for the same resources. Additionally, an issue that forces you to take down one (web or database) will not force you to also take down the other. If your database lives on one of the web servers and you need to perform maintenance, your app will effectively become offline, since down goes your database as you perform updates. Also, ideally you would protect your database server within a private subnet in your VPC. If you have the web and database on the same server, they will both be in a public subnet, since you're web will require access to an internet gateway.
2) Depends. If you want to maintain total control of the database server, than use an EC2 instance where you retain operating system control. If you want to take advantage of features like Multi-AZ for high availability or allowing AWS to manage things like updates for you, RDS can be a great option. Cost also plays a role. For things like read-replicas and Multi-AZ, you will pay more, but you are purchasing performance and high availability. Thus, depends on your requirements. You can find the features of RDS here: RDS Product Details
3) For anything running on an EC2 instance (database or web) or if you decide to use RDS, you may provision and attach additional storage volumes as necessary. The type of storage you select will depend on the performance requirements, your budget, and the kind of workload you expect your database to face. Amazon provides the storage options available to you as well as a section for adding more storage here: RDS Storage Options
If you are worried about too many requests overwhelming your EC2 t2.micro instance, consider creating an ELB load balancer and setting up an auto-scaling group which will allow you to expand your capacity as necessary while distributing traffic such that no one server gets overwhelmed.
every once in a while i read/hear about AWS and now i tried reading the docs.
But such docs seem to be written for people who already know which AWS they need to use and only search for how it can be used.
So, for myself, to understand AWS better i try to sketch a hypothetical Webapplication with a few questions.
The apps purpose is to modify content like videos or images. So a user has some kind of webinterface where he can upload his files, do some settings and a server grabs the file and modifies it (e.g. reencoding). The Service also extracts the audio track of a video and trys to index the spoken words so the customer can search within his videos. (well its just hypothetical)
So my questions:
given my own domain 'oneofmydomains.com' is it possible to host the complete webinterface on AWS? i thought about using GWT to create the interface and just deliver the JS/images via AWS, but which one, simple storage? what about some kind of index.html, is there an EC2 instance needed to host a webserver which has to run 24/7 causing costs?
now the user has the interface with a login form, is it possible to manage logins with an AWS? here i also think about an EC2 instance hosting a database, but it would also cause costs and im not sure if there is a better way?
the user has logged in and uploads a file. which storage solution could be used to save the customers original and modified content?
now the user wants to browse the status of his uploads, this means i need some kind of ACL, so that the customer only sees his own files. do i need to use a database (e.g. EC2) for this, or does amazon provide some kind of ACL, so the GWT webinterface will be secure without any EC2?
the customers files are reencoded and the audio track is indexed. so he wants to search for a video. Which service could be used to create and maintain the index for each customer?
hope someone can give a few answers so i understand AWS better on how one could use it
thx!
Amazon AWS offers a whole ecosystem of services which should cover all aspects of a given architecture, from hosting to data storage, or messaging, etc. Whether they're the best fit for purpose will have to be decided on a case by case basis. Seeing as your question is quite broad I'll just cover some of the basics of what AWS has to offer and what the different types of services are for:
EC2 (Elastic Cloud Computing)
Amazon's cloud solution, which is basically the same as older virtual machine technology but the 'cloud' offers additional knots and bots such as automated provisioning, scaling, billing etc.
you pay for what your use (by hour), for the basic (single CPU, 1.7GB ram) would prob cost you just under $3 a day if you run it 24/7 (on a windows instance that is)
there's a number of different OS to choose from including linux and windows, linux instances are cheaper to run without the license cost associated with windows
once you're set up the server to be the way you want, including any server updates/patches, you can create your own AMI (Amazon machine image) which you can then use to bring up another identical instance
however, if all your html are baked into the image it'll make updates difficult, so normal approach is to include a service (windows service for instance) which will pull the latest deployment package from a storage (see S3 later) service and update the site at start up and at intervals
there's the Elastic Load Balancer (which has its own cost but only one is needed in most cases) which you can put in front of all your web servers
there's also the Cloud Watch (again, extra cost) service which you can enable on a per instance basis to help you monitor the CPU, network in/out, etc. of your running instance
you can set up AutoScalers which can automatically bring up or terminate instances based on some metric, e.g. terminate 1 instance at a time if average CPU utilization is less than 50% for 5 mins, bring up 1 instance at a time if average CPU goes beyond 70% for 5 mins
you can use the instances as web servers, use them to run a DB, or a Memcache cluster, etc. choice is yours
typically, I wouldn't recommend having Amazon instances talk to a DB outside of Amazon because of the round trip is much longer, the usual approach is to use SimpleDB (see below) as the database
the AmazonSDK contains enough classes to help you write some custom monitor/scaling service if you ever need to, but the AWS console allows you to do most of your configuration anyway
SimpleDB
Amazon's non-relational, key-value data store, compared to a traditional database you tend to pay a penalty on per query performance but get high scalability without having to do any extra work.
you pay for usage, i.e. how much work it takes to execute your query
extremely scalable by default, Amazon scales up SimpleDB instances based on traffic without you having to do anything, AND any control for that matter
data are partitioned in to 'domains' (equivalent to a table in normal SQL DB)
data are non-relational, if you need a relational model then check out Amazon RDB, I don't have any experience with it so not the best person to comment on it..
you can execute SQL like query against the database still, usually through some plugin or tool, Amazon doesn't provide a front end for this at the moment
be aware of 'eventual consistency', data are duplicated on multiple instances after Amazon scales up your database, and synchronization is not guaranteed when you do an update so it's possible (though highly unlikely) to update some data then read it back straight away and get the old data back
there's 'Consistent Read' and 'Conditional Update' mechanisms available to guard against the eventual consistency problem, if you're developing in .Net, I suggest using SimpleSavant client to talk to SimpleDB
S3 (Simple Storage Service)
Amazon's storage service, again, extremely scalable, and safe too - when you save a file on S3 it's replicated across multiple nodes so you get some DR ability straight away.
you only pay for data transfer
files are stored against a key
you create 'buckets' to hold your files, and each bucket has a unique url (unique across all of Amazon, and therefore S3 accounts)
CloudBerry S3 Explorer is the best UI client I've used in Windows
using the AmazonSDK you can write your own repository layer which utilizes S3
Sorry if this is a bit long winded, but that's the 3 most popular web services that Amazon provides and should cover all the requirements you've mentioned. We've been using Amazon AWS for some time now and there's still some kinks and bugs there but it's generally moving forward and pretty stable.
One downside to using something like aws is being vendor locked-in, whilst you could run your services outside of amazon and in your own datacenter or moving files out of S3 (at a cost though), getting out of SimpleDB will likely to represent the bulk of the work during migration.