Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Cloud Hosting : What is Cloud hosting or Grid Hosting?.

[melorhostsl]

What is Cloud Hosting or Grid Hosting?.

Could you please give me in and out idea about these two.


thank you.

[zendzipr]

Depends on who you ask. In the case of GoGrid or Amazon EC2, expensive Xen VPS servers.

[DATARTIM]

It's clustered hosting allowing for infinite scalability.

Or Marketing.

There are very few new technologies and it's more a new way of using old/current tech.

[web-hosting]

here's a info and a graphic display of Cloud Hosting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_Hosting

Grid Hosting - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_hosting

[angathan]

I have heard about cloud computing, I work in a hosting company. I cant differentiate both cloud hosting and the normal hosting service we do. the server is present at one end, we user server management tool like webmin e.t.c to manage server remotely(SaaS) which is said as SaaS in cloud computing. Now too we can use Google application on out hosting which is called as PaaS.

Then what is new and advantage using cloud hosting.

[xojac]

When people talk about grid hosting, they usually mean clustering several dedicated to one cluster computer which is then able to run certain tasks. While cloud hosting is desired to synchronize several computers or to offer certain services on each of the computers. Those might be based on grid hosting but that is not necessary it can also be based on one dedicated.

[gm22]

Cloud hosting is more like a marketing trick. It's trendy to talk about cloud hosting. Sounds good, good marketing pitch, and, after a while, gets a little annoying.

Same with Web 2.0. People think, web 2.0 is some soft of new technology. I even saw hosting companies offering "web 2.0" hosting. Everyone seems to jump on a band wagon.

[InfiniteTech]

Originally Posted by gm22

Cloud hosting is more like a marketing trick. It's trendy to talk about cloud hosting. Sounds good, good marketing pitch, and, after a while, gets a little annoying.

Same with Web 2.0. People think, web 2.0 is some soft of new technology. I even saw hosting companies offering "web 2.0" hosting. Everyone seems to jump on a band wagon.

True. Very annoying indeed.

[melorhostsl]

Thanks for the info.

[angathan]

Hi,

Thanks, so the colud hosting is a marketing trick. i was confused a lot when peoples ask for cloud hosing. Now i got it. The normal hosting with marking idea.

[dazmanultra]

Cloud hosting is not a marketing trick...

[JFSG]

Originally Posted by gm22

Cloud hosting is more like a marketing trick. It's trendy to talk about cloud hosting. Sounds good, good marketing pitch, and, after a while, gets a little annoying.

Same with Web 2.0. People think, web 2.0 is some soft of new technology. I even saw hosting companies offering "web 2.0" hosting. Everyone seems to jump on a band wagon.

It's not a gimmick. It can protect you from hardware failures, instant scability which normal servers can't. However, I do agree its abilities are being exaggerated.

[dazmanultra]

Definitely, it's not a one size fits all solution and it won't bring world peace, but it solves a lot of problems for a lot of people.

[Cyrus255]

Originally Posted by LaptopFreak

It's not a gimmick. It can protect you from hardware failures, instant scability which normal servers can't. However, I do agree its abilities are being exaggerated.

Why does everyone, even a reasonable person like yourself think it's exaggerated? Most people don't know what it's like to have a half million user traffic spike in a half hour, hardware failure, etc.

It's the only way if you are a major player. I've only reached max 120k uniques in a day (but if it were in an hour I'd definitely need to do so) so I haven't gotten to that point yet, but I have looked into it more and more and see it as an inevitability for me, not as question of if, but when.

Think of it as Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). The shared infrastructure costs help everyone save money. You basically are billed for consumption of the resources, rather than the resources themselves. Multiple major companies usually don't all experience traffic spikes at the same time, so it's kind of pooling them together in a way?

[JFSG]

Originally Posted by Cyrus255

Why does everyone, even a reasonable person like yourself think it's exaggerated? Most people don't know what it's like to have a half million user traffic spike in a half hour, hardware failure, etc.

It's the only way if you are a major player. I've only reached max 120k uniques in a day (but if it were in an hour I'd definitely need to do so) so I haven't gotten to that point yet, but I have looked into it more and more and see it as an inevitability for me, not as question of if, but when.

Think of it as Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). The shared infrastructure costs help everyone save money. You basically are billed for consumption of the resources, rather than the resources themselves. Multiple major companies usually don't all experience traffic spikes at the same time, so it's kind of pooling them together in a way?

I don't mean it is not as good as it seems. It's just that many cloud providers make it sounds so wonderful as if it is invincible. I agree with you on your opinion though. What I was referring to is the exaggeration by providers to gain more sales. Many claim it can provide 100% uptime, but what if both power and UPS fail, 100% uptime will turn negative at once.