PSSC Labs
Request a Quote

Category: Coverage

PSSC Labs Featured in IT Pro Portal: 7 hidden AWS Costs That Could Be Killing Your Budget

By marketing@site-a.com

Is your organization paying what it should for hosting with AWS?

The AWS Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) service has many advantages, including easy scalability, pay-for-what-you-use, as-you-go pricing, and an enormous array of options and upgrades – so many that your AWS bill may become quite complicated. Have you been suffering from sticker shock but have no idea which of the literally thousands of line items on your invoice are the culprits? Here are seven hidden AWS costs that could be breaking the bank. 

1. Unused Instances 

Among the biggest contributors to inflated AWS bills are unused or underutilized EC2 instances, which result in your organization paying for resources it is not using. Be sure to terminate all instances as soon as you are finished using them; note that this applies separately, to each world region. Also make sure to monitor your EC2 usage data for low CPU usage, bandwidth, and I/O, which are red flags that may indicate underutilized servers that could be shut down. 

2. Unneeded Orphaned Snapshots 

Terminating an unused or underutilized EC2 instance isn’t enough. Even though the attached EBS volumes are automatically deleted along with the instance, your snapshots will remain stored on Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3), and you will continue to be charged monthly for them. Deleting these orphaned snapshots will save as much money as deleting the original EBS volume, so unless you’re certain you’ll need them again to create future EBS volumes, make sure to get rid of them. 

3. Unattached/Unused EBS Volumes 

It’s good practice to delete EBS volumes, except for root volumes, that are not attached to EC2 instances. Not only do these unattached volumes add charges to your AWS bill – whether they are being used or not – but they also pose cyber security risks to any sensitive data stored on them. Even when an EBS volume is attached to an EC2 instance, it’s billed for separately, so make sure to delete volumes you no longer need. Just make sure to back up the data first; once the EBS volume is deleted, the data is lost. 

4. Underutilizing Reserved Instances 

Many AWS users pay as they go and never consider purchasing reserved instances (RIs), which are pre-booked resources and capacity for a one- or three-year term. Because you are committing to pay for all of the hours during your term, your hourly rate is deeply discounted. RIs can save your organization a lot of money – if you actually use all of the time you’ve bought. Calculating your usage that far in advance can be difficult, and if your needs are lower than you anticipated, RIs can be a money pit. If you’ve bought RIs that you have no use for, consider selling them on the AWS Marketplace. 

5. Data Transfer Costs 

Most of the time – but not always – transferring data into EC2 is free, but transferring data out will always cost you. How much you will be charged depends on how much data is being transferred and where it is going, and these costs vary by Region. Moving data across services within the same Region is usually less expensive than moving data across services outside your Region, and some Regions have higher costs than others. To minimize data transfer costs, you must pick the least expensive route for your data to flow through, depending on what it is and where it is going; because of the wide variations in prices, this is easier said than done. 

6. Unused Elastic IP (EIP) Addresses 

EIPs are static different EC2 instances. They allow users to mask an instance or software failure by rapidly remapping the address to another instance in their account. AWS users are allotted one free EIP address with each running EC2 instance, but they are charged hourly if they attach additional EIPs to the same instance. Additionally, users are charged for any EIPs that are not associated with a running instance. As with instances, orphan snapshots, and EBS volumes, you should monitor your account for EIPs you are no longer using. 

7. Unused Elastic Load Balancers (ELBs) 

ELBs, which are commonly put in front of your web servers, automatically distribute incoming application traffic, scale resources to meet traffic demands, and are designed to keep a minimum number of EC2 instances running. You are charged monthly for each ELB, whether you’re using it or not, and per GB transferred. If any of your ELBs are not attached to back-end instances, consider registering instances or deleting them. In a similar vein, if an ELB is not attached to any healthy backend instances, consider troubleshooting the configuration or deleting it. Additionally, before you can terminate an EC2 instance, you must delete any ELBs associated with it. 

Other Hidden Costs 

Other potential “gotcha’s” that could be inflating your AWS bill include unused services started in AWS OpsWorks, unhealthy instances, and fees for excessive API calls. There are also numerous indirect costs associated with AWS and other cloud solutions in the form of performance, reliability, and cyber security problems. Misconfigured AWS servers were at fault for the recent data breaches at business associates of Verizon, the Republican National Committee, and private security firm TigerSwan. In February, numerous large websites were knocked offline due to an error by an employee at AWS, and the tech community recently expressed grave concerns about widespread chaos if AWS were to have another, larger failure, particularly since so many financial institutions rely on it. 

The Cloud Isn’t Always Cheaper 

Despite sticker shock and concerns about these hidden and indirect costs, many organizations continue to grumble and pay their AWS bill due to the misconception that cloud computing is always cheaper and more efficient than purchasing their own IT infrastructure. This is a myth. In many cases, an organization’s monthly AWS bill alone costs more than an in-house solution would. If your organization processes large amounts of data, it would probably be more cost-effective to purchase and maintain your own infrastructure. 

It’s not always necessary or beneficial to abandon the cloud completely. Many organizations would greatly benefit from a hybrid approach, where they use their own infrastructure for certain tasks and utilize cloud solutions when they need additional capacity. 

Don’t feel like you’re locked into paying AWS or another cloud provider forever. If you can’t seem to get your AWS bill down to a reasonable level, purchasing your own equipment is worth looking into. 

Source: http://www.itproportal.com/features/7-hidden-aws-costs-that-could-be-killing-your-budget/

PSSC Labs Featured in Forbes: The Cloud Vs. In-House Infrastructure: Deciding Which Is Best For Your Organization

By marketing@site-a.com

Fueled by mounting storage requirements, ease of use, automatic software updates and users’ thirst for limitless access and maximum flexibility, cloud computing has grown exponentially over the past several years. In fact, since 2009, spending on cloud computing has been growing at a rate that is 4.5 times faster than the rate of IT spending, and it’s expected to exceed six times the rate from 2015 to 2020. This is certainly because there are many situations in which utilizing the cloud makes sense.

The most obvious would be in a small startup operating on a lean budget where cash flow is tight. This is because cloud computing allows access to resources without large capital expenditures. The cloud can also be an option for enterprises of all sizes as it relates to disaster recovery. And the cloud excels at providing options for immediate capacity whereby companies can have separate instances for moderate burst capacity.

However, the cloud is not always superior to building in-house IT infrastructure. Cloud providers’ slick marketing materials gloss over the technology’s numerous drawbacks, such as skyrocketing fees, poor performance and cybersecurity issues. The decision between using a public cloud and building your own IT infrastructure is not so different than deciding between renting a workspace for your business or buying your own building; both decisions boil down to having total control (and responsibility) over your own environment versus depending on a landlord to provide an adequate workspace and fix problems quickly and adequately.

Beyond The Hype: Not All Clouds Have A Silver Lining

Some enterprises choose cloud services for their scalability; the typical pricing model for cloud computing is “pay for what you use,” with organizations having the option to buy more (or less) computing power as their needs change. This may not be as cost-effective as it sounds. Cloud computing can easily result in unexpected costs, especially when dealing with performance and security setbacks. Trading algorithm developer Deep Value found using Amazon’s EC2 service to be 380% more expensive than running its own internal cluster, noting that “For one-off peaks, EC2 makes sense, but given the ongoing nature of our simulated analysis, moving to our own data center is a very clear winner.”

Cloud security is another serious issue, especially because it is up to the enterprise — not the cloud provider — to properly configure certain cybersecurity settings. Improperly configured cloud security settings were at fault for the recent massive breach of voter data mined by a data analytics company that had been hired by the Republican National Committee.

Additionally, enterprises that use a public or shared cloud can experience a cyberattack or performance issue through no fault of their own. This past February, AWS customers experienced a widespread outage because AWS misconfigured something. For these reasons, enterprises running mission-critical applications with high-availability needs and compliance or regulatory requirements may want to think twice about using a public or shared cloud.

Public and shared clouds are also plagued by performance and reliability problems. Using a public cloud means potentially sharing a network with so-called “noisy neighbors” or users who hog resources. Further, since cloud service providers have servers in several dispersed locations, users may experience latency issues and are often forced to pay exorbitant fees to avoid them. In contrast with bare-metal hardware users, public cloud customers have limitations on resource availability and may struggle with application performance and data transfer rates.

When Is In-House Infrastructure A Better Option?

Several factors determine when it is better to deploy in-house infrastructure than to use the cloud. At the top of this list is the monthly cost. For some companies, the $30,000 monthly AWS bill exceeds the cost of an in-house solution. For other companies, the decision is tied to performance, reliability and security issues. Organizations that own their infrastructure have total control over their computing environments; if something goes wrong, or if an organization wants to implement new features, it can just call on its own staff to make the fixes or changes instead of having to depend on their cloud provider to do it. An in-house IT infrastructure is probably best for high-scale IT environments that process large amounts of data, especially if that data is constantly growing, and for companies that want maximum flexibility to make changes.

There are also competitive issues to consider. Giving a potential competitor insight into your business model, applications and customer base is a very risky endeavor. A recent Wired article outlined Dropbox’s “exodus” from Amazon. While cost was one of the reasons Dropbox cited for building its own infrastructure, so were concerns over Amazon’s foray into file-sharing services — Dropbox’s domain. Enterprises would do well to be cautious about the prospect of Amazon, which already competes in numerous industries, eventually offering services that will compete against those of its own cloud storage customers.

It Doesn’t Have To Be All Or Nothing

The decision of where to store data and run applications doesn’t have to be a strict matter of cloud vs. in-house. In some cases, the best solution is a combination of both (hybrid). For some enterprises with limited budgets, a public cloud is the most realistic choice. Other organizations may want to implement in-house servers to handle standard traffic and turn to the cloud for additional capacity.

However, organizations need to seriously consider their individual data needs beyond the “cloud first” hype. This includes prioritizing requirements for processing, performance, storage, security, data transfers and, of course, determining how much they are willing and able to spend. There is inherent value in building and owning in-house infrastructure instead of being at the mercy of a virtual landlord. Enterprises must shift their mindsets and view their IT departments as assets and business drivers rather than cost centers. An investment in appropriate IT infrastructure ultimately drives long-term profits that will support the growth of not only the IT department, but also the larger business of which it is a part.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2017/07/25/the-cloud-vs-in-house-infrastructure-deciding-which-is-best-for-your-organization/#1251e6b420f6

PSSC Labs Featured on The Next Web: Why are companies choosing on-premise HPC over cloud?

By marketing@site-a.com

The concept of High-performance Computing (HPC) in the cloud has taken a massive leap forward these past years. While the idea of using High-Performance Computing (HPC) services like storage, servers, databases, networking and software applications etc over the cloud isn’t new, what is new is the speed and commitment companies have placed in the cloud. However, with the expansion of business, some companies look for on-premise options. Why? Because the benefits of High-Performance Computing (HPC) in the cloud are manifold but it is also countered by some drawbacks that are leading organizations to look at other options. Let’s have a contrasting discussion on both!

Supercomputing in the cloud
Cloud computing is explained by PCMag in the simplest way possible as storing, managing and accessing data and programs over the internet instead of on machine. The best examples we are all familiar with include Google Drive, Google Docs, Microsoft OneDrive and Dropbox as cloud storage applications and more sophisticated cloud service offered is High-performance Cloud Computing that include Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Google, and IBM.

Cloud computing can provide multiple features to an average user, like instant availability of resources, availability of large capacity for storage and processing, flexibility at the application level and a bare minimum level of performance guaranteed by the provider. However, the user for HPC generally deviates from all these features and presents a tailored requirement for their specific application. A hardware fine-tuned to the needs of the application is the dream of such users; they are not here to run generic applications.

They often try to get rid of the OS formalities and start talking to the hardware directly. The cloud OS “nanny” might not allow you to get too direct with her baby, whereas, HPC applications need to bypass the OS kernel a lot.

When is it ideal to get cloud based HPC?
Most applications are very sensitive about the networks interconnect; the data needs to flow at speeds to match the high-performance demands. A virtual cluster is limited to the rules defined by the kernel and many high-performance network loads need to manage the connection and data transfers ‘on the wire’, which is very hard to visualize on a virtual scheme. Along with it comes the requirement of design specific storage system. A strong I/O system is next on your requirement list, without that you are likely facing bottlenecks, backlogs and unnecessary queuing most of the times.

A cloud-based HPC is a very good bargain while working with rudimentary tasks, maybe for a startup, small business ventures or an on-demand test facility with a limited influx of tasks. But deeper and more elaborate discussion would go into the decision of using cloud-based HPC against on-premises for anything bigger than that.

On-premise Supercomputers
When you think of supercomputers, the first image that streams through your mind is one of massive rows of mainframe computers filling an entire room with lots of noise and huge cooling pipes circling around it.

That was true at least half a century ago. Today, supercomputers (referred to as High-Performance Computers) can perform all your high demand computing tasks running advanced applications and manage large data sets with advanced network management tools in much more compact servers or clusters. Clusters of HPCs share the workload by dividing the tasks into parts and feeding them to the parallel processing units of a supercomputer (as opposed to serial processing of a normal computer).

Advances in technology mean that today’s supercomputers come in compact designs (in a sleek 1U and 2U size casing) with less maintenance and resource demands. For example, the PowerServe HPC by PSSC Labs 16 to 72 total cores of Intel® Xeon processors with as much as 1024 GB of high-performance memory packed in a 1/2U blade chassis, versatile network connectivity options and supporting all the latest operating systems. Even better, their unique design means a 90% energy efficient power supply. So having an on-premises supercomputer is not so ‘super’ difficult at all.

Why are companies choosing on-premise HPC over the cloud?
Amir Michael, a former hardware engineer at Google and former hardware and data center engineer at Facebook, founder, and CEO of Coogan, says “Surprisingly, a lot of people are thinking about off-boarding from the cloud and trying to figure out when the right time might be to do that. Other customers are pretty big in co-location and they are wondering if they should build their own data centers.”

This calls for a good night long debate. Companies today see on-premise HPCs as a liability because of the high purchasing costs and associated maintenance costs. Maintenance also comes with the potential need to hire more personnel to maintain the infrastructure. So naturally, outsourcing this to AWS, Google, Microsoft, etc. seem like the best way to go about it. However, this step can be shortsighted and vitally dangerous. In addition, putting your entire business (data, analytics and most importantly intellectual property) on the cloud means you are giving up control of the lifeblood of your business.

Reasons why on-premise HPC is taking the lead
Let us consider some of our own parameters and see how that puts our computing needs into perspective:

Performance: 
With your own HPC infrastructure (whether just a rack server or a cluster), you achieve a much better performance per dollar per hour as compared to any other generic server. Since the hardware you have is to meet your specific application requirement, you are achieving the optimum level on the cost-performance chart. By going with a dedicated on-premise option you can design your hardware that complies with your exact needs.

Cost:
The main reason cloud computing has soared in terms of adoption is the belief that outsourcing your computing needs to the cloud is cheaper than doing it yourself. The answer isn’t always so clear-cut. When scoping out Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), factors may arise that aren’t in the original calculation which leads to a higher long-term TCO for trying to do HPC in the cloud. As many companies are realizing who are moving off AWS to go in-house, the promise of lower cost through the cloud isn’t quite so clear-cut.

Access to Data:
Continuing on the last note, every time you want to access your own data (which you are keeping at Azure server for as low as $0.02), you have to pay a price to retrieve that data. On-premises HPC grants access to your data any time you need. A popular solution for startups is to use NAS (Network Attached Storage) solutions by vendors such as Seagate. But for more complex computing projects, you may need a scalable block and object storage platform like the Surestore by PSSC Labs.

Security
AWS and others have made strides here but it was not long ago that a simple keystroke error brought down nearly 30% of the websites on the east coast. Companies need to evaluate putting their livelihood into someone else’s hands versus the peace of mind of having critical HPC functions close at hand and under your control.

Source: https://thenextweb.com/guests/choosing-on-premise-hpc-over-cloud