Servers: My place or yours?
Home and Away fixtures
It’s practically easier to have your DC in your basement, but strategically silly. If you don’t need physical servers, it’s time to decide if it’s better to locate the virtual servers outside your building.
From a practical standpoint, locating servers in your own data centres and offices would seem to be a good idea. You know exactly where your servers are, how they’re configured, the applications they’re running and how to get them fixed when things go wrong.
They’re also very clearly yours and under your direct control with no ifs or buts when it comes to who owns, not just the hardware and software, but the data and the intellectual property therein.
Strategically, in-house servers make less sense. You have to find and pay for the floor space, and also source and run the servers and all that goes with them - everything from power supplies and air conditioning plant to fast backbone switches, storage, management tools and the staff needed to keep it all going.
You also have to provide for backup and disaster recovery with the end result a very expensive operation that can account for a large chunk of your IT budget.
But does it really have to be that way and, in this age of mass virtualisation, does it really matter where your servers are located?
Maybe, maybe not. Let’s consider some of the options, starting with co-location.
Co-location or “colo” entails siting your servers in someone else’s data centre, in effect, renting rack space. This retains many of the advantages of in-house deployment, in that the servers, storage and data are still clearly yours.
And you don’t have to worry about building and running the data centre, with all that entails in terms of supplying power, cooling and the like.
Ready availability of fat internet pipes plus, with many, off-site disaster recovery facilities are other co-location advantages On the downside, you still have to buy and maintain server hardware and software, and employ staff to look after it unless you also opt to out-source its management.
Here you can opt for dedicated servers, typically from Tier 1 vendors such as HP and Dell, configured to your specification but sourced and installed in the provider’s data centres, delivering all the advantages of co-location and more.
Clearly this approach takes away yet more of the hassle of running a data centre. However, care is needed as you’re then much more reliant on third parties to keep your systems running.
Choosing a reliable provider and establishing a good working relationship becomes essential, backed up by solid service level agreements (SLAs) and a clear understanding of who’s responsible for what.
Equally, it’s important that ownership is clear, especially of the data and intellectual property in the applications involved.
Such concerns become even more important if you decide to go from dedicated physical to virtual servers hosted on hardware likely to be shared with others.
And it's essential if you choose to sign up for a cloud-based computing solution, such as the Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud, or Microsoft’s Azure where you rent processing heft rather than servers which, in theory, could be hosted anywhere in the world.
In many ways the cloud could be viewed as the ultimate in server outsourcing enabling companies to reduce overheads but still have access to the infrastructure they want when they need it.
The security and legal implications are immense and you need to be fully aware of what’s involved, and properly protected, before going down this route. ®
Always read the footnotes
"The security and legal implications are immense"
And yet only worthy of a single sentence right at the bottom of the page.
Its a matter of trust.
Do you trust someone else to back up your data properly? Your data. Your business life.
Worst Article - EVER!
Has Alan Stevens been on the Carlsberg this morning, as this probably the best example of a really bad article I've eve come across.
"And you don’t have to worry about building and running the data centre, with all that entails in terms of supplying power, cooling and the like."
With all the recent examples of cloud failures, lack of backups, outages, security concerns and governement intrusion, worrying about your "data centre" is one of the highest priorities for any CIO right now.
Just because you "outsource" some of the operation to a third party you do not devolve responsibility for your data and your operation. I would actually argue that you need to be even more in control of the situation.
All the options mentioned are useful tools in reducing the costs of providing IT. The article however gives the impression that the cloud can remove all your headaches, when in fact it simply shifts the pain to your balls.