LÖVE

Ooh. love.cloud.

Cool.

love.orgy: even better.

Avalon wrote:Just remember, relying on a single server would kind of be against the idea of a cloud. o/

There's nothing wrong about running a single server in a cloud system as long as that server can handle the load.
That's the whole point of load balancing, boot more servers as needed and connect them to the cloud, when they're not needed shut them down.

Sardtok wrote:

Avalon wrote:Just remember, relying on a single server would kind of be against the idea of a cloud. o/

There's nothing wrong about running a single server in a cloud system as long as that server can handle the load.
That's the whole point of load balancing, boot more servers as needed and connect them to the cloud, when they're not needed shut them down.

It's not a cloud system if there is a single centralized server, simple as.

Booting "more servers" is a concept of grid computing, so don't get the two confused. o/

Cloud computing is one of those stupid terms anyway.

Fizzadar wrote:Cloud computing is one of those stupid terms anyway.

Not really, the concept of cloud computing essentially refers to peer-to-peer (or highly aggregated) non-centralized processing and storage.

Avalon wrote:Not really, the concept of cloud computing essentially refers to peer-to-peer (or highly aggregated) non-centralized processing and storage.

Not necessarily peer-to-peer, but peer-to-peer is one of the many cloud computing models out there.
I wouldn't say that Facebook, Google Apps, Amazon S3 or GoGrid, to name a couple of cloud based systems, have anything to do with peer-to-peer networking.

Google Docs, as provided by Google Apps, is a typical SaaS, where an Office package is delivered through the browser.

There are many definitions of cloud computing. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (US department of commerce) defines it like this:

NIST wrote:Cloud computing is a model for enabling convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction…

It goes on to define the characteristics, service models and deployment models: http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SNS/cloud-c ... index.html

EDIT:
I just noticed the "highly aggregated" remark, which could, depending on what meaning of aggregate you use, mean almost anything that has anything to do with the Internet (aka the cloud). I still think the NIST definition is a good resource.

That was the definition I was thinking of..

Sardtok wrote:

Avalon wrote:Not really, the concept of cloud computing essentially refers to peer-to-peer (or highly aggregated) non-centralized processing and storage.

Not necessarily peer-to-peer, but peer-to-peer is one of the many cloud computing models out there.
I wouldn't say that Facebook, Google Apps, Amazon S3 or GoGrid, to name a couple of cloud based systems, have anything to do with peer-to-peer networking.

Google Docs, as provided by Google Apps, is a typical SaaS, where an Office package is delivered through the browser.

There are many definitions of cloud computing. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (US department of commerce) defines it like this:

NIST wrote:Cloud computing is a model for enabling convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, and services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction…

It goes on to define the characteristics, service models and deployment models: http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SNS/cloud-c ... index.html

EDIT:
I just noticed the "highly aggregated" remark, which could, depending on what meaning of aggregate you use, mean almost anything that has anything to do with the Internet (aka the cloud). I still think the NIST definition is a good resource.

This is why I shouldn't post when rather tipsy. At the end of the day though, I think we can agree that a single server (or singular point of failure if you want to expand into load balancers, geo-distribution, e.t.c) really goes against the idea of a cloud.

On a note, Amazon CloudFront/S3 and most of the other 'cloud' providers aren't clouds, they're just CDN's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing

To be honest, it's abused as a waffly internet term

On topic: any progress on this?

No, not really.. I have yet to figure out how to actually do this (not that I don't know how to make it, just that I don't know yet what of the many ways to do it I'm going to use)