LWN: Comments on "Eucalyptus: running a private cloud on Ubuntu"

Eucalyptus: running a private cloud on Ubuntu

giraffedata — Sat, 02 May 2009 00:11:37 +0000

They are charged for each hour the virtual machine runs

I always find this description misleading. It's really, "charged for each hour the virtual machine exists." There's no such thing in EC2 as a virtual machine that is not running. If you don't want to pay the full time charge, you have to destroy your virtual machine when you don't need it and build another one like it later on. Also, because it's meant for applications that can work that way, various system glitches can cause your virtual machine to vaporize, and you're expected to build a replacement when that happens. This is in contrast with other cloud architectures where the virtual machine is expected to be perpetual.

Incidentally, Amazon literature often describes the pricing scheme as "you pay for only what you use," which is similarly misleading. You pay for every hour a virtual machine exists, regardless of how much real CPU time and memory it uses.

Eucalyptus: running a private cloud on Ubuntu

jspaleta — Fri, 01 May 2009 17:06:30 +0000

I have to apologize, I was misremembered a headline stating that RightScale and Canonical were "partners" as being in the actual body of the press release. Chalk one up to the lay press for grossly misinterpreting a business relationship in a headline.

Closer re-reading of the press releases doesn't indicate there is a dedicated explicit partner relationship between the two business entities at any level. And in fact I can't find either company listing the other as a partner in any communication after the initial press release annoucing support for Ubuntu by RightScale.

If they don't have a business partner relationship, then you are right. I shouldn't have any hopes for Canonical being able to leverage the relationship with RighScale to drive revenue of any sort. There's no direct business relationship to leverage.

-jef

Eucalyptus: running a private cloud on Ubuntu

dmag — Fri, 01 May 2009 02:57:25 +0000

jef-

I agree with your first point: The article goes from saying "The Eucalyptus project is important because it 'frees' cloud computing", then talks about RightScale without mentioning it's putting your free cloud in the hands of a proprietary 3rd party website.

On the other hand, I disagree about your second point. This is Open Source. Anyone is free to support it (or not) as they choose, pay money (or not) as they choose, subscribe to services (or not) as they choose. Using (or supporting) Ubuntu does not require paying anybody money. Arguments that you're "squeezing out" Open Source authors by not paying them are just silly.

If you really felt that way, you should take it the next step: I'll bet 90% of Canonical support is really just supporting Apache/Linux/PHP/MySQL/GNU/Other stuff they didn't write. Therefore, you should be outraged that Canonical is "squeezing out" these projects by not paying them a fair share of the revenue. Next, you should complain about all the freeloaders^H^H^H (I mean users) who use Ubuntu but don't subscribe to Canonical support. What if they ask their teenage neighbor for support instead? Is that as immoral as going to the bathroom during ads on TV?

Alternately, do you think RightScale should pay CentOS? Why not MySQL too? Apache? Where do you draw the line?

Switching topics:

The article states "RightScale first focused on CentOS, but switched to Ubuntu as its primary supported distribution because of Canonical's cloud plans" but I can't find that documented anywhere. As far as I can tell, they are just adding a 2nd OS, not refocusing.

Disclaimer: I use RightScale.

Eucalyptus: running a private cloud on Ubuntu

dmuino — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:36:49 +0000

You interact with eucalyptus by using the ec2 command line tools. Download them from amazon, and just set the env vars S3_URL and EC2_URL to point to your eucalyptus instance.

Eucalyptus: running a private cloud on Ubuntu

bronson — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:52:54 +0000

No description of workflow? I'm curious how one actually interacts with Eucalyptus.

Can anyone say how Eucalyptus compares to ProxMox or Enomaly? Or even virt-manager?

Personally, I'd like to replace 6 aging servers with one fast box and an open, pleasant to use management console. Is there any software out there that actually keeps thing simple?

Eucalyptus: running a private cloud on Ubuntu

jspaleta — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:37:14 +0000

Rightscale has a subscription model for its cloud services. http://www.rightscale.com/products/

Pretty hefty prices once you get out of the "free" category.
So here's a question for you..is Canonical getting a cut of that subscription? Its great that Canonical is making it easy for RightScale to have a SaaS model by offering Ubuntu at no cost..but it would be tragic if Canonical wasn't getting a piece of the $500 a month action.

So hows that work out exactly? RightScale doesn't mention Canonical backed technical support associated with their Ubuntu platform on any customer facing material as far as I can tell. And I haven't seen it mentioned in the press releases. Compare that with the IBM/Virtual Bridges announcement from last December concerning VERDE virtual desktop bundle which explicitly stated that the bundle cost included Canonical technical support:
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=vi...

And it gets even more complicated as Eucalyptus now has its own venture capital funding and is offering its own support options directly to enterprises: http://www.eucalyptus.com/enterprise/support

So where do Canonical's potential service offerings come into play between RightScale's SaaS subscription model and Eucalyptus's own enterprise support options? It seems to me that's a very good way for Canonical to be squeezed out of the revenue model between the value-add that RightScale's services provide and the technical expertise that Eucalyptus provides. I don't see how something like landscape fits in with RightScale's services. I'd love to see how the three of these entities fit together in terms of paid support providers.

Right now I just don't see it. Seems to me the big potential winner here is RightScale because the are offering the value-add integration service which leverages the no acquisition cost of Ubuntu as provided by Canonical. But I don't see how this arrangement makes it any more likely that someone will pay Canonical for support directly. I really hope RightScale has some sort of revenue sharing arrangement with Canonical.

-jef