“简单”的原因是什么？ 建站不宜选择云主机？
我最近一直在通过阅读有关云托管的内容来跟上进度。
对于与 StackOverflow 具有大致相同特征的客户端（Windows 堆栈，相同数量的访问者），我需要设置一个托管环境。 Stackoverflow 从租赁转向购买。
问题是他们为什么不选择云托管？
既然 Stackoverflow 不使用任何需要在专用服务器上运行的奇怪东西，并且据说云托管是“最佳”解决方案，为什么不使用它呢？
通过得到这个问题的答案，我希望自己能够做出权衡的决定。
I have been doing some catching up lately by reading about cloud hosting.
For a client that has about the same characteristics as StackOverflow (Windows stack, same amount of visitors), I need to set up a hosting environment. Stackoverflow went from renting to buying.
The question is why didn't they choose cloud hosting?
Since Stackoverflow doesn't use any weird stuff that needs to run on a dedicated server and supposedly cloud hosting is 'the' solution, why not use it?
By getting answers to this question I hope to be able to make a weighted decision myself.
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（7）
老实说，我不知道为什么 SO 在私有服务器上像它那样运行。
但是，我可以假设为什么网站会更喜欢这样：
同样，这是一个成本效益问题，每个企业都会以不同的方式处理它。
I honestly do not know why SO runs like it does, on privately owned servers.
However, I can assume why a website would prefer this:
Again, this is a cost-effectiveness issue, and each business will handle it differently.
我认为这可能是一个很大的原因：
来自尼尔·肯尼迪
I think this might be a big reason why:
From Niall Kennedy
显然我不能说 StackOverflow，但我有一些客户走的是“云托管”路线。 所有这些现在都在疯狂地试图脱离云。
在很多情况下，它还没有 100% 实现。 用户跟踪的限制（请求者的 IP 地址的传递）、云上其他负载导致的性能波动以及未知的使用数量只是出现的一些问题。
Obviously I cannot say for StackOverflow, but I have a few clients that went the "cloud hosting" route. All of which are now frantically trying to get off of the cloud.
In a lot of cases, it just isn't 100% there yet. Limitations in user tracking (passing of requestor's IP address), fluctuating performance due to other load on the cloud, and unknown usage number are just a few of the issues that have came up.
据我所知（这只是基于阅读各种博客故事），大多数时候云托管的美元成本根本行不通，特别是考虑到一些规划或分析。 只有对于那些预计流量会出现难以预测或季节性爆发的高度波动的人来说，它才真正有价值。 我想它还处于起步阶段，竞争力还不够。
IIRC 杰夫和乔尔（在一个播客中）表示，他们确实计算过这些数字，但结果并不利于云计算。
From what I've seen (and this is just based on reading various blogged stories) most of the time the dollar-costs of cloud hosting just don't work out, especially given a little bit of planning or analysis. It's only really valuable for somebody who expects highly fluctuating traffic which defies prediction, or seasonal bursts. I guess in it's infancy it's just not quite competitive enough.
IIRC Jeff and Joel said (in one of the podcasts) that they did actually run the numbers and it didn't work out cloud-favouring.
我想杰夫在其中一个播客中说过，他想学习很多有关主持的知识，并且通常很乐在其中。 抛开一些令人头疼的问题不谈（参见 SO 博客），我认为这是一次很棒的学习经历。
正如许多其他答案所指出的那样，云计算确实具有其优势，但有时您只是希望能够控制服务器的每一个部分。
I think Jeff said in one of the Podcasts that he wanted to learn a lot of things about hosting, and generally has fun doing it. Some headaches aside (see the SO blog), I think it's a great learning experience.
Cloud computing definitely has it's advantages as many of the other answers have noted, but sometimes you just want to be able to control every bit of your server.
我曾经研究过一个相当小的网站。 运行一个小型 Amazon 实例一年的成本约为 700 英镑 + 带宽成本 + S3 存储成本。 具有类似规格和体面带宽津贴的 VPS 托管价格约为 500 英镑。 所以我认为成本与它有很大关系，除非你的流量会波动而且很多！
I looked into it once for quite a small site. Running a small Amazon instance for a year would cost around £700 + bandwidth costs + S3 storage costs. VPS hosting with similar specs and a decent bandwidth allowance chucked in is around £500. So I think cost has a lot to do with it unless you are going to have fluctuating traffic and lots of it!
我确信来自 SO 的人会回答这个问题，但是“这不是更麻烦吗”？ 老式托管仍然很便宜，除非您遇到很大的可扩展性问题，否则为什么要进行云托管？
I'm sure someone from SO will answer it but "Isn't just more hassle"? Old school hosting is still cheap and unless you got big scalability problems why would you do cloud hosting?