Amazon EC2 Capacity & Workflow Questions

I’m hoping some of you with experience using amazon EC2 could offer some advice… of course it’ll be subjective which is fine, I’m pretty sure your guestimate would be better than mine.

I am planning on moving all my client’s websites from shared hosting environments to Amazon EC2. They’re all pretty low traffic sites (the busiest site receives around 50 unique visitors a day). There’s about 8 sites, but I may expand this as I take on more projects and host more sites… current capacity planning is for say 12 sites.

Each site runs on ASP.Net (Umbraco CMS), and requires a SQL Server database.

My thoughts are one of the following:

1. Setup a Small Instance (1.7gb RAM, 1 EC2 Compute Unit), and run IIS and SQL Server Express on that server.
2. Setup 2 Micro Instances (613MB Ram ea开发者_运维问答ch, Up to 2 EC2 Compute Units) – one for IIS, the other for SQL Server.

Which arrangement do you think would work the best for my requirements. I’ve started setting up a Micro instance with Server 2008, SQL Server Express, etc… and finding it not coping with the memory requirements, hence considering expanding. I could always configure on a Small instance, then export the AMI and fire it up in a Micro instance after, and do the same every time any serious changes to the server are required. I guess I could even do all updates etc on a spare Small Spot instance, then switch load that AMI up in a Micro and transfer the IP Address across, so I don’t need to do too much work on the production servers. I figure if I store all my website data files on EBS Volumes, then it should be fairly easy to move hosting between servers with minimal downtime, while never working on a production server.

I’m interested to know what you all think, and what strategies you employ for such activities as upgrades, windows updates, software installations, etc.

And what capacity do you think I’d need for my requirements.

Cheers Greg

---

Well, first-up, Server 2008 doesn't play well in the 613MB RAM the Micro instance gives you. It runs, but it's a dog, and it barks louder the more services (IIS, SSE, etc) you layer on top. We using nothing smaller than a Small for Server 2008, and in fact typically do the environment config in a Medium and scale down to Small once the heavy lifting is complete and the OS is ready to use. Server 2003, however, seems to breathe easier on a Micro - but we still do the config on a larger instance and scale down.

We're running low-traffic websites on Server 2003/IIS6 in a Micro, with a Server 2008/SS install on a shared, separate, Small instance. We do also have one Server 2008/IIS7 Micro build running, but only to remind ourselves why we don't use it more widely. ;)

Larger websites run Server 2008/IIS7 in either Small or Medium instances, but almost always still using that shared separate SS instance for database services. We try not to deploy multiple SS installations, since it makes maintenance and backups more complex.

Stashing content and config on EBS Volumes is of course good practice, unless you like rebuilding the entire system whenever an Instance disappears. Snapshotting your Instances periodically is also good practice, since you can spin-up a new Instance from a baseline AMI and swap the snapshot in as a boot Volume for fast recovery in the event of disaster.