CTO Blog

You are in: CTO Blog

Subscribe

Recent Posts

Navigate


Search the blog

« Technology Populism versus Worthy Development equals Twine | Main | IT is essential; but the IT department may not be… »

Cloud, Grid, Utility or Infostructure? How to be low cost, green and smart!

Bit of a disjointed series of connections; first I read how a single major trunk connection failure in India takes out a significant amount of the Indian Software Industries online capabilities until it's fixed. Then there has been another Blackberry outage in the USA affecting around 50% of users, plus a few other less headlined stories, all of which can be summed up as extremely large scale system use involving numbers and ‘infrastructural’ services that are simply beyond what we have normally been contemplating in system design. Whilst the Indian example is pure ‘infrastructure’ as we normally define it, the Blackberry problem may, or may not be, but to the users I doubt if they will think of their devices in terms of an application.

We now need a new term for a more complex set of capabilities that extend outside our organisation as well as inside and are the basis for an increasing amount of our personal work, and our enterprises capabilities to do business. My colleague Ron Tolido coined the term ‘Invisible Infostructure’ which to me is a good description. And he defined it as "Using virtualization and grid technologies to deliver infrastructural services – including all facilities to exchange and process (inter) company information – as a commoditized, preferably almost invisible utility". Eventually, even core business services will merge into it, creating a true ‘business infrastructure’. An invisible infostructure captures and supplies information as if it were via the other markets.

In my research and thinking I have been approaching this not from the direction of the failures that I just outlined, but in trying to determine the value proposition of the new wave of technology so that a definition for a design, implementation and operation can be arrived at. I suspect a number of us are haunted by the past when we failed to see the bigger impact of a clutch of technologies as an environment change and provided solutions to elements that quickly became limiting factors. This has lead me to ‘Cloud Computing’ which if I were forced to make a distinction of the term over Grid computing it would be that since Globus started to the drive towards creating high performance computing structures by ‘grids’ of computers we have seen a big change in the technology world. The starting point was from a few users/applications wanting to use many computers in parallel to solve something big, i.e. Research centers etc. sharing resources to utilize them better; to many users doing many small tasks simultaneously with no discernable constants for the allocation of resources.

Well that’s my personal justification for the name change – it’s a debatable issue and your thoughts and comments are welcomed. Look up Wikipedia on this and they add a further interesting definition; ‘Cloud computing is a general label for the many different approaches to the use of shared computing resources, rather than having local servers, or personal devices handling users’ applications’.

The more research I do on Cloud Computing, and the more I hold what I find up against my efforts to define how people are already using technology personally, but how I expect Business use to expand this the more I realize just what a huge impact this will have on our existing ‘infrastructure’, and if we don’t move to change how we will find ourselves the weakest, slowest or least reliable link in any business transaction. Put another way if our email server is unreliable then right now we know it has a big impact internally and frequently externally, but place yourself into Web 2.0 style shared collaboration, or host a community, and it’s going to get distinctly ‘personal’ if you can’t handle the demand.

Reverse that and be the company that can provide ‘smart services’ to extend capabilities to do business better with your customers and suppliers and you have a competitive lever. The challenge is that you have no idea what the demand will be as the skill of determining and sizing ‘online’ interactions is very hazy, and when the interactions relies on services from several resources being combined it gets to be impossible, hence the need for an ‘infostructure’ approach.

Actually the European Union believes in this so much as an enabling factor for business across the EU that it's investing in a 17 million Euro project called ‘RESERVOIR – Resources and Services Virtualization without barriers – with IBM acting as a lead for what they refer to as ‘the internet operating system for business’. Meantime at a more every day level in addition to IBM there is HP, Sun and even Amazon all out there offering what, to judge from the take up, are pretty popular early variations on Cloud Computing, though it might be better to describe them as ‘utility computing’ though Amazon of course call it ‘the elastic cloud’. And now I see that Dell is joining in as well.

Add a Green IT dimension to this as well and it really does seem that the time has come to do some serious re evaluation of the requirements for, the role of, and the way to provision of what was the Cinderella of IT – Infrastructure. Get your approach right and you might be able to combine cost reduction, corporate green policy and still come out with the ability to support a wave of new business use.

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.capgemini.com/cgi-bin/blog/mt-tb.cgi/364

Comments

The Name - "cloud computing" really comes from the background that we (System architects) used to depict the network infrastructure as a Cloud in our diagrams (because we didn't know much better of details behind a network) and network folks(like cisco) drew the systems as a cloud in their diagrams.

I like the word "network computing" or HaaS better.

my 2 cents on status of Cloud computing: I think the key to commoditizing anything is having standards that accurately let the consumer know what they are getting. So standards like cents per KWhour(electricity) , dollars per gallon(gasoline) etc have helped commoditizing the utilities. For computing the move to a stage like this will need standards and benchmarks.

There are a few standards like dollar per CPU per hour(network.com) , cents per 1GB transfer etc. But they do not accurately let the consumer know what they are getting.Also there are not many benchmarks available for comparison. What does a CPU perhour mean to me.

The closest workable standard I have seen is from Amazon (AWS). Their pricing gets the full picture right(cost for storage +cost for bandwidth + cost of Computing as one package).The computing cost is the most difficult to standardize. AWs has a concept of small , medium large instances. Clearly we need a better way of describing computing.

The confusion over names is tremendous, and covers everything from utility and high performance to cloud and grid.

I think that role requirement is a better definition and links back to the type of services required.

Hi Andy,

Just to say that in Capgemini OSS Partner we are already using cloud computing (AWS EC2/S3) to build our:

* Support images infrastructure
* DemoCenter
* Open Source SaaS

I am trying to build a partnership whith AWS.

Best regards,

Lalanne Jean-Guillaume
Service Manager - OSS Partner

Hi Jean-Guillaume

Do you have any experiences in applying cloud computing that you can share with us?

regards andy

Hi Andy,

Sorry for my late reply.

We do have experiences using Amazon Web Services EC2 cloud especially.

This is a tremendous service that is giving quickly a lot of opportunities that we couldn't have before.

It gives us agility to create quickly support environment for our OSS support offer. For instance, we do have the ability to provide in some minutes an environment to my OSS Partner colleagues if one bug is rised by one of our customers. Environnement already set with profiling and debuging tools installed and configured.

We do plan to propose a functionnal testing plateform on the grid for our customers running in parallel 1, 10, 20 injector servers.

We do plan also to build "best practice" plateform about High availibility and clustering for middleware components (JBOSS, Tomcat, Apache,...) but also databases (mysql,postgresql)

We have also started to propose SaaS offer within Capgemini first by selling packaged prototypes around several IT domains (ECM, CRM, ERP, ITIL, CMMI, CMS, SSO, etc...).

Best Regards,

Jean-Guillaume LALANNE

Hi Jean-Guillaume

very interested to see your comments on bug tracking and testing - thats the kind of interesting practical experience that its good to share. I have to confess that i suspect that this is not one of the benefits that we would have immedidiately thought of for applying Cloud Computing.

any other tangental but equally powerfull side benefits?

regards andy

Hi Andy,

Right now we don't have much more benefits in mind for the coming period. We have already many actions to carry out.

Anyway, I have started to discuss with the AWS Alliance Manager Justin Burks about an eventual partnership. If you like the email or telephone number I can provide you with it.

The opportunities are huge with this cloud computing:

* paralell computing for everyone (Hadoop) very good for indexing :

http://developer.amazonwebservices.com/connect/entry.jspa?externalID=873&categoryID=112
http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/AmazonEC2

* interesting startups : www.elastra.com, http://www.rightscale.com, www.coghead.com, etc...

Best Regards,

Jean-Guillaume LALANNE

Hi, folks!

May I also invite you to checkout www.morpheXchange.com as one of the startups offering cutting-edge, managed cloud compute platform on top of the AWS for ruby on rails.

Best.
alain

Hi Alain

can you offer practical details and your experience on Morphexchange?

thanks andy

Post a comment

Commenting Policy

Name:
Email Address:
URL:
Remember personal info?
Comments: (you can't use HTML tags for style)