Ca sa nu credeti ca vorbim de hype

Am aruncat o privire pe postul anterior si mi-am dat seama ca poate fi citit si in cheia hype/pompieristica. Behold the Grid Computing!

Uite un fragment din (celebra, dar prea putin citita) What is Web 2.0 a lui Tim O’Reilly:

Operations must become a core competency. Google’s or Yahoo!’s expertise in product development must be matched by an expertise in daily operations. So fundamental is the shift from software as artifact to software as service that the software will cease to perform unless it is maintained on a daily basis. Google must continuously crawl the web and update its indices, continuously filter out link spam and other attempts to influence its results, continuously and dynamically respond to hundreds of millions of asynchronous user queries, simultaneously matching them with context-appropriate advertisements. It’s no accident that Google’s system administration, networking, and load balancing techniques are perhaps even more closely guarded secrets than their search algorithms. Google’s success at automating these processes is a key part of their cost advantage over competitors.

It’s also no accident that scripting languages such as Perl, Python, PHP, and now Ruby, play such a large role at web 2.0 companies. Perl was famously described by Hassan Schroeder, Sun’s first webmaster, as “the duct tape of the internet.” Dynamic languages (often called scripting languages and looked down on by the software engineers of the era of software artifacts) are the tool of choice for system and network administrators, as well as application developers building dynamic systems that require constant change.

Daca admitem ca etapa software-ului ca artefact s-a dus, iar locul i-a fost luat de software-ul ca serviciu, e evident ca si pe partea de hardware e nevoie de mult-mult mai multa flexibilitate. Practic, grid computing asta asta face: include hardware-ul in aplicatie.

2 Comments »

  1. ITist said,

    December 3, 2006 @ 04:47

    Sincer, eu am impresia ca este mult hype. Software as a service (SaaS) exista de citiva ani acum si tot tinara speranta a ramas, in mare parte. E drept ca mai nou Jeff Bezos a facut ceva valuri la Amazon cu aceasta propunere noua de inchiriat putere de calcul, insa la fel, personal, nu mi se pare ca-i prea mare brinza. De multa vreme firmele serioase stiu ca nu pretul hardware-ului le ingradeste evolutia ci poate software-ul sau factorul uman. Hardware-ul a evoluat mult mai rapid decit software-ul, asa ca ce-i de la Amazon nu cred sa revolutioneze ceva. Revenind la Google cu ale lor grid computers si data centers tot asa, sint curios daca va face valuri serioase pt. ca deocamdata nu cred ca Docs & Spreadsheets de exemplu sa fie foarte important in mediul de business (serios). Pe linga pretul hardware-ului care tot scade mai e un factor important: datele. Ce firma serioase isi da datele (informatiile) pe mina altora doar ca aia au un grid de inchiriat sau ofera storage in data centrele lor? Mi se pare o momeala asta cu dat datele pt. prelucrat sau storat la altii, la care nu vad sa muste prea multi. La urma urmei cine are nevoie de putere de prelucrare serioasa o sa-si construiasca ei acel grid, ca doar nu o fi ceva ce doar Amazon sau Google sint in stare sa faca. Eu zic sa nu le supra-apreciem pe astea si subestimam capacitatea altora de a-si construi ei puterea de calcul necesara. Iar datele firmei stiu cu totii ca sint aur curat, care precis nu vrei sa ajunga pe mina altora fie ei Amazon sau Google. Sau poate vor inchiria acel grid sa afle parolea uitata de vreun executiv de la o firma si pt. care un PC simplu ar avea nevoie de 129 de ani :), insa mai mult decit atit nu prea as crede ca se va intimpla.

  2. catalin said,

    December 4, 2006 @ 20:43

    Salut, ITist.
    Foarte argumentat raspuns. Cred insa ca privim un pic din 2 puncte de vedere diferite: eu privesc din punctul de vedere al start-upurilor web 2.0 , in vreme ce tu te referi la companiile mature. Sunt de acord insa ca Amazon poate sa ofere o momeala companiilor pe care le-ar putea achizitiona ulterior.

RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI

Leave a Comment