bses's comments

> What cloud advocates always say is that the $50k monthly will save you money from not needing to hire a team to manage it for you, and that over the course of 10+ years you will be ahead. Is that true in anyone's experience? Every once in a while somebody posts about their competing bare-metal system and it looks like a lot of people have managed to cut their server costs by 99% (based on the numbers they post) by avoiding the cloud as a service

Too many weasel words.

You're right, I replied too quickly.

> We recently discussed new logging tools at work. It was either a redundant Amazon EC2 cluster with ElasticSearch for $50K monthly, or two large bare metal servers with rsyslog and grep for $400 monthly. The log ingestion and search performance was roughly the same...

If grep has the same search performance as elasticsearch, you should not be using elasticsearch and any comparison is bullshit.

> We recently discussed new logging tools at work. It was either a redundant Amazon EC2 cluster with ElasticSearch for $50K monthly, or two large bare metal servers with rsyslog and grep for $400 monthly. The log ingestion and search performance was roughly the same...

If grep has the same search performance as elasticsearch, you should not be using elasticsearch and any comparison is bullshit.

> It was either a redundant Amazon EC2 cluster with ElasticSearch for $50K monthly, or two large bare metal servers with rsyslog and grep for $400 monthly.

$50K monthly is $69.44 an hour, or 8 instances of the most expensive thing from https://aws.amazon.com/elasticsearch-service/pricing/ (with 488GB RAM)

Please cite references, your numbers seem made up. Where can you get 256GB of RAM for $200/month?