在不了解你的工作规模的情况下,很难回答这一问题。 某些需要考虑的事项是正确的,至少像你的软件成本一样,其成本将非常低。

www.un.org/Depts/DGACM/index_spanish.htm 审议情况:

• One machine (web + app + db) vs multiple machines.
• Data backups (a must have IMHO), be that external service, external hardware, or a dedicated machine. Also relevant: offsite copies regularly maintained.
• Redundancy - multiple network cards/server, multiple power supplies/server, lights-out abilities of servers if they re not easily accessed, multiple connections in the network (if that s key to your application)
• Power - you ll want clean power for a server - not only does a UPS keep the system running for a few minutes during a brown out or blackout, but the higher level ones condition the power coming out.
• Cooling & noise - server hardware generates some serious heat, and some systems generate some serious noise - you need somewhere to put these things with good airflow + cooling that isn t going to drive anyone crazy.
• Networking - if you re building a multi-computer setup (eg. 1 DB server, 2 app servers, 1 load balancer) you ll also need good networking between them - ideally on a separated network (for security and performance).
• is this for a production system, a test system, a development system, all three?

<>Solutions:

1. One large machine: big ram, big/fast drives, large processor. Pros: Simplicity. Cons: Expensive, different services require different components but you have to get the best of all, doesn t scale - will have to switch to another format if you need more later.
2. A machine of reasonable size for each service: db machine - large ram, as fast drives as possible/affordable, app machine - good processor, reasonable ram, some hd. You may also want to split out file storage into a SAN (which both the app and DB machine can use) Pros: Buy the best for the task, save where it s not needed. Cons: multiple machines to support, it s easy enough to just buy two large machines - so 2x #1 cost
3. Machine cluster - a load balancer up front, several app servers behind that, with several database machines behind this. Pros: scales well, can use commodity hardware (eg. $500 desktops) to be quite inexpensive Cons: Every part has to be built with possibility or expectation of failure (not a bad idea), administration can be high, networking could become key

有许多选择和选择,网上有许多组合实例。 云层服务(例如,Amazon s AWS)对公司要求和它们用来提供解决办法的云层服务进行了一些出色的案例研究——这些设置有真正的世界硬件类比。

你拥有的钱(取决于货币;)现在似乎已经够多了——根据选定的硬件,你甚至能够进入集群。 你试图解决瓶颈问题,但你现在却不说是哪里了——如果它拥有一台台式机的 d服务器,则可能还有其他干扰的过程(包括病毒扫描器、脱光镜工艺、指数化),甚至可能很简单,因为配置非常严格(透镜、记忆使用)。 你重新工作的规模在这方面确实是关键,但上一代的服务器硬件可能足以满足你们的需要。

你真的需要告诉我们你目前的工作环境和项目。

支出资金是因为你很少实行良好政策,但如果需要升级,则具体显示的是,首先要把你的团队调回和升级。

鉴于你的问题,我假定你再次谈论改进生产基础设施的问题,这些基础设施也用于发展。 除非你重新处理一个非常繁忙的地点,否则你可能不需要在靠近这个地点的地方花大量钱,用新的服务器。

你们认为需要多少钱?

您是否研究其他途径来改进我的薪酬业绩?

这种预算比额表的制度通常不是你刚刚从一个词汇中选择的。 你们需要确切地说明你们需要什么,为什么在你订购大量硬件之前需要。

视你们需要什么,我们不知道你们的项目是多么大。 我认为,对于中等规模的项目来说,现金会够公平,而且你毕竟应该拥有许多钱。

我在一家类似的公司工作。

我们都拥有强大的膝上型计算机(主要是MacBook Pros和CinkPads(<>),在那里我们有发展环境。 我们更喜欢膝上型计算机,因为如果我们必须从家里工作,或者由于某种原因不能上台,那就没有问题了。

我们在林德有一个测试服务器,我们在那里也储存着我们共有的储存库(一些旧的SVN st,但现在主要是Gite)。

我们的发展地点要么在热门(如果是较小的地点)上,要么在EC2上。

我们的发展计划:

• develop the module/theme on localhost
• integrate it on the test server
• show the page on the test server to the customer
• deploy to live

我知道你有许多答案。 然而,没有人提到虚拟化。 我不想在这里 throw下一句话。 这就是我如何创造我的发展环境,我不想以任何其他方式这样做。 所有服务都在虚拟机器上。

主要收益:弹性

You can add more hardware to be able to take on new projects with barely any software changes. You can backup your systems easily. You can upgrade your systems easily.

我可以列举所有的内容,但你发现,这更加灵活、更便宜和可靠。

申斥: 如果你不以令人信服的方式建立虚拟机器/网络等,你将不会获得所有这些好处。