Reputation: 19202
Heroku's great, but expensive. How do most startups scale after hosting with Heroku starts getting too costly?
Let's say we're running rails on a linux server, typical bandwidth and storage needs.
Rackspace? I've just heard of getting into trouble if you go down this route. Google app engine I've heard is another dangerous route.
Amazon Web Services? Just peel off Heroku's layer and save the money there?
Upvotes: 1
Views: 167
Reputation: 61689
Rackspace has a couple of options for hosting.
Rackspace Cloud: this option is very similar to Amazon but somehow is a bit more limited on the some of features they provide. However, their prices are a bit more competitive's than AWS's. They provide a Rest API as well that you can use to manage your servers programmatically (Although not compatible with AWS's API)
Rackaspace Hosting: with this option you get the whole physical server/infrastructure for you to manage. This option is very cost effective if you need a lot of CPU power (physical CPU) and you use your servers permanently (no on-demand). For example, we created an entire Cloudera/Hadoop cluster using several machines using Rackspace and migrated all of our jobs from EMR (Amazon's Elastic Map Reduce) to our physical cluster with more than 50% savings. The downside to this option is that you generally have to manage the physical servers yourself.
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 19145
Heroku is a value added layer of services on top of AWS EC2.
If Heroku is more expensive, you can run your own app servers on AWS using EC2 (app servers), ELB (load balancer), ElastiCache (memcached/redis), and RDS (Postgres/Mysql).
All of the Heroku services are provided on top of their applications running on AWS EC2.
Heroku allows ease of use and implements tools/services you will need to build yourself (deployment, scaling, etc). They do this at a premium over the cost of the raw AWS services. You may be able to achieve lower costs and economies of scale with larger instances.
Upvotes: 2