Then, after configuring the rendering engine I would seed the cache. So, in your case I would start up a large instance on Rackspace and then load all the data in a local Postgis instance.
A notable example is the StackExchange network itself. With this I'm not saying that Amazon AWS is inferior to others, I'm just saying that sometimes traditional hosting solutions can scale as well as Cloud-based ones. Previously if you needed lots of disk space you HAD to get a large instance while on EC2 you can provision storage, cpu and memory with finer control
Rackspace has recently come up with a volume strategy like EBS so disk space should not be an issue anymore. Linode has a great availability SLA: 99.9% and they claim great performance because they don't overprovision. It happened to me while I was on holiday: it felt very professional. If the host running your VPS fails Rackspace will take care of relocating your instance and restarting it on a different server and they will do this in 4h (it's in their SLA). You will have to come up with a backup and restore strategy yourself whereas both Linode and Rackspace provide point and click daily and weekly automated snapshots and restores. Whenever you reboot your server the public ip will change: this does not happen on Linode or Rackspace. It could also be an issue with MTBtiles databases unless you pick the larger instances I/O contention could be an issue (especially if you plan on seeding the tiles on EC2, rather than copying them over). EBS volumes fail too (there's plenty of sad stories in the news) and generally have poor I/O. EC2 instances are actually expected to fail and they will fail Cloud Server are (more) resilient than EC2 instances. Having gone through the same myself some time ago I can tell you that the critical factors in my decision to host a web maps service on Rackspace rather than AWS were: You will have much less choices to make (like use S3 or not, load balancers or not, backups, etc or not and how much is that going to cost?) whose outcome is difficult to predict AND, more importantly you will be able to use tools that you are already familiar with. When picking an architecture for a service that relies so much on a 'classic' architecture like web maps never underestimate the effectiveness of more traditional hosting solutions like RackSpace Cloud Servers or Linode. 
I'm also looking for any good alternatives to AWS and anything to watch out for when using cloud services for web maps. I've been hosting my web maps for some time through "ordinary" hosting providers, but these have their own limitations (upload bandwidth is one, speed is another). What I'm basically looking for is some feedback about how viable AWS is for hosting your own web maps as an individual (which means it shouldn't cost too much, say up to $30/month). UPDATE: just to elaborate on my question.
So some kind of EC2 instance would be needed, but what kind? Ideally I would need a tile serving app on the web server that could serve MBTiles (instead of uploading hundreds of thousands of tile bitmaps individually). Does anyone have experience with running Web maps (tile server + client JS scripting) on Amazon Web Services (S3, EC2 etc.)? What kind of AWS configuration is needed for running a low-to-medium bandwidth Web map app, covering a small(-ish) area (city to small-country size)?Īll of the tiles would be pre-rendered and uploaded to S3.
0 kommentar(er)
