[Koha] Cloud-based Koha vs locally hosted Koha

[Jesse Lambertson]

Thank you mark.

We already do have a good plan for back-up. But with these other issues,
your points are valid and jive with some other conversations I am having as
we get ready to set this up (soonish).

I will have to look at Brooke's other point about carefully picking the
(external) hosting environment - one that gives me command-line access to
update everything as needed.
The idea in this thread here seems to be that hosting elsewhere means that
it will not be as easy for me to update. But I have to imagine there is
some host out there that has everything partitioned in a way so that I can
manipulate my own data at will (maybe that is still just a dream).

I will dig into that search next.

Thank you everyone.

Jesse

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Mark Tompsett <mtompset at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Greetings,
>
> On 10 December 2014 7:06:37 am NZDT, BWS Johnson <
> abesottedphoenix at yahoo.com> wrote:
> [SNIP]
>
>> The only difference I can spot might actually weigh as a positive in
>> favour of cloud based service. When you have a physical server and
>> suffer a local catastrophe, such as an earthquake, fire, sinkhole, et
>> cetera, there goes your data.
>>
>
> Actually another cost consideration is the hardware costs vs. hosting
> costs. Hardware dies over time and needs to be replaced. Budgets get cut,
> and a monthly hosting cost is less likely to be axed compared to a new
> server cost ever 4-5 years. So, in some sense, I think hosting externally
> and not on your own local hardware is better.
>
> And comparing costs, you may be able to find hosting that works well for a
> cost that when amortized over 4-5 years is actually cheaper. That is,
> $20/month (let's say) * 12 months * 4 years = $960 for 4 years. This is
> comparable to some cheaper machines which perfectly suffice, but I know I
> prefer to drool over the $2500+ machines. :)
>
> Sadly, you aren't likely to be continually upgrading components. After 4
> years, a locally owned piece of hardware will have dropped from a middle
> class machine to low end machine, while the hosted environment may have
> progressed, because of hosting provider upgrades. :)
>
> And, you aren't having to do your own backups, if you hosting on the
> cloud. If you have locally hosted machine, you need to figure out how to
> back up elsewhere. A good backup plan has on-site same drive, on-site
> different drive, and off-site backups. A hosting provider tends to have
> these in place. Do you want the hassle of having that yourself? This is
> related to the point that BWS Johnson made.
>
> And what if your local machine dies? Sure you have a backup, but you
> actually have to spend the day rushing around buying a new server. With
> hosting, hardware failures like that are not your worry. No budget
> stresses, because you don't have the cash to go buy it now, and most
> service level agreements give you less than a hour downtime per year.
>
> GPML,
> Mark Tompsett
>



-- 
Jesse A Lambertson
Librarian
Sultan Qaboos Cultural Center
1100 16th St, NW
Washington, DC 20036