Want to protect your cyber security and still get fast solutions? Ask a secure question today.Go Premium

  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 227
  • Last Modified:

Amazon EC2 - Is it a good fit?


I have a client who requires a VPS to run a small ASP.NET application.  The application uses a SQL 2008 backend and ASP.NET 3.5 frontend.  

It's a fairly simple app and wont have very heavy user access.  There may be 4-5 people accessing it per day and only for a few minutes at a time.  

We have tried to use a shared windows account at accuwebhosting.com which is really inexpensive (great because these guys are a new startup on a shoestring budget) and it was ALMOST flexible enough but not quite.  

The VPS I'm looking at has 1GB RAM, 40GB storage, and 250GB transfer per month.  That's ~$280 bucks a year.  

Usually I'm all about dynamic technology but, here I'm a little hesitant.  Should I be?  

Any help will be greatly appreciated.  

  • 3
  • 2
1 Solution
I would have preferred more RAM. But to get it going, it probably suffice. But more is better ...
ttist25Author Commented:
Thanks for the response.  Have you had any experience on Amazon EC2?

Do you think it might be a good fit?
Amazon is a great fit.

At about the same price you get  the option to do much more. You can backup and restore your server image, add more storage on demand, create multiple server instances with load balancing for that special occasion, and much more.

This is a calculator with your data as I see it. I put in the forecast bandwidth from such an application (not some theoretical limit), and put you on an annual contract using a reserved  instance. I also added 100GB of monthly backup.

You can try this setup risk free for a nominal fee of $0.12 per hour using on demand instances, so if you can tell within 2 days if it works for you, you end up paying $5.8 for the test.


NEW Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows

Backup and recover physical and cloud-based servers and workstations, as well as endpoint devices that belong to remote users. Avoid downtime and data loss quickly and easily for Windows-based physical or public cloud-based workloads!

ttist25Author Commented:

Thanks so much for your response.  Filling out the calculator was a step beyond the call of duty!  THANKS.  

Sorry for not responding sooner but I've been drowning in forums and PDF's and websites in reference to this and, so far I'm thinking EC2 might not be a good fit.  

My (incorrect) assumption was that "utilization" was measured per access rather than instance uptime.  This server will need to be up 24/7.  Persistent data is a consideration given the SQL database so the EBS would definitely be required in case the instance were to drop.

At $55.96 per month this is almost $400.00 per year more than the traditional VPS I was looking at.  Am I missing something?  It's very possible that I am!  :)

Thanks again for your help.
As I said, if you only look at costs, EC2 is not the cheapest solution. However, it is the most elastic and adaptable architecture.
If your client's application is likely to grow in usage, or become mission critical, or require DR, or need load balancing, or if the architecture is to change in any way, then EC2 will probably be able to provide the best, fastest and cheapest change.
ttist25Author Commented:
Thanks a lot shalomc

Featured Post

Automating Your MSP Business

The road to profitability.
Delivering superior services is key to ensuring customer satisfaction and the consequent long-term relationships that enable MSPs to lock in predictable, recurring revenue. What's the best way to deliver superior service? One word: automation.

  • 3
  • 2
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now