4

We have an on-going e-commerce web project (both B2B and B2C) on asp.net framework 4.0. MS Sql-Server 2005 is used as a RDBMS.

The main numbers for the project capacity are:

  1. 15.000 products
  2. 50.000 images for products
  3. 400 B2B user
  4. 3000 B2C user
  5. 800-1000 daily unique visitors

we are planning to host this project on a cloud infrastructure.

From a developer point of view which platform would you consider for this application?

Thanks in advance..

Adam Right
  • 955
  • 6
  • 17
  • 35
  • 2
    sorry to break your happynes for the cloud, we have the double load and we use one computer 4 cores, (+4 virtual), 16Mg mem, 5 pools, and works like a charm :) – Aristos Mar 11 '12 at 21:20
  • @Aristos, on 16 megabytes of RAM? Now _that's_ impressive :) – bdonlan Mar 12 '12 at 07:58
  • @bdonlan (I mean Gb 16Gb) Actually the system use only 10, and have 6Mg physical free. I do not think anyway that this numbers (1000 unique visitors and the rest) are too much, except if the application have memory problems, or memory leaks, or the database is not correctly design and eat a lot more space or what ever, but this problems you going to have also on the cloud. And from the prices that I check for the cloud computing, is toooo expensive. Also on this server we host and 20 more sites with the emails, backups and all of a server. – Aristos Mar 12 '12 at 08:20
  • how much bandwidth is provided by your server? let say 1000 unique visitor per day on average, would a 10 mbps line do the job? – Bigs Feb 01 '15 at 23:10

4 Answers4

4

I don't know why you would consider anything but Microsoft's Azure. Every component of your application uses MS products.

There are VS Azure templates to use to convert your app into an Azure app. There aren't too many differences for developing for Azure vs. web server(s).

TheGeekYouNeed
  • 7,509
  • 2
  • 26
  • 43
4

Apart from MS Azure, have you considered AppHarbor?

"AppHarbor is a fully hosted .NET Platform as a Service. AppHarbor can deploy and scale any standard .NET application."

To clarify: I've never used it myself but I've heard some nice feedback about them.

friism
  • 19,068
  • 5
  • 80
  • 116
alex
  • 2,450
  • 16
  • 22
3

An 'on-going' application implies that it already exists as a standard Windows Server/IIS/ASP.NET/SQL stack (however standard that may be). Moving it to Windows Azure has distinct and valuable advantages, but these need to be weighed up against the cost to migrate the application to Windows Azure. While you may find that there it is reasonably easy to get up and running in demo mode, the application would not have been architected with Azure (or any other public cloud platform such as AWS) in mind. Don't take too much heed of the 'easy migration' markitecture, make your own informed assessments.

As far as other platforms go, Google AppEngine doesn't play with .NET and AWS, while an awesome platform, doesn't have a good story for SQL Server (where you have to roll your own). <1000 daily visitors is not many, and doesn't need all the scalability offered by public cloud platforms (where 1000s per second is the problem domain), and may not justify the costs. Without knowing much more than your brief description, I would recommend that you go with traditional hosting and co-location. Perhaps use the cloud for add-ons, such as microsites, and find out what needs to be learned before your throw you lot in with a PaaS paltform.

Note: I am passionately pro public cloud and have been recommending and working with it for years. I just think that there are many cases where the public cloud is not the best option due to the costs and risks measured against business value

Simon Munro
  • 5,399
  • 6
  • 33
  • 40
  • 1
    I would say you could get up and running pretty quickly in more than just demo mode. IMHO the point about being architected for the cloud is more about getting the most out of the high-availability and scalability and cost advantage of the cloud. My experience is that this can come over time once the application is up and running, provided you can commit the ongoing investment that is... – Mike Goodwin Mar 11 '12 at 21:25
0

Google App engine is a no go. Your application would need to be python or a JVM language.

Mike Goodwin
  • 8,810
  • 2
  • 35
  • 50