And other notes from last week’s IASA NE cloud computing roundtable (more about the meeting format later – also note the Web site currently does not have up to date information – we are volunteers after all .
We had good attendance – I counted 26 during the session, including folks from Pegasystems, Microsoft, Lattix, Kronos, SAP, The Hartford, Juniper, Tufts, Citizens Bank, Reliable Software, Waters, and Progress Software, among others (I am sure I missed some), providing an interesting cross-section of views.
The major points were that no one is really thinking about the cloud as a place for accessing hosted functionality, and everyone is wondering whether or not they should be thinking about developing applications specifically for the cloud.
We touched on the landscape of various cloud computing offerings, highlighting the differences among Google, SalesForce.com, Microsoft, and Amazon.com. Cloud vendors often seem to have started with trying to sell what they already had – Google has developed an extensive (and proprietary) infrastructure for highly available and scalable computing that they offer as Google App Engine (the idea is that someone developing their own Web app can plug into the Google infrastructure and achieve immediate “web scale”).
And Salesforce.com had developed a complex database and functionality infrastructure for supporting multiple tenants for their hosted application, including their own Java-like language, which they offer to potential cloud customers as Force.com.
Microsoft’s Azure offering seems to be aiming for a sort of middle ground – MSDN for years has operated a Web site of comparable size and complexity to any of the others, but Microsoft also supplies one of the industry’s leading application development environments (the .NET Framework). The goal of Azure is to supply the services you need to develop applications that run in the cloud.
However, the people in the room seemed most interested in the idea of being able to set up internal and external clouds of generic compute capacity (like Amazon EC2) that could be related, perhaps using virtual machines, and having the “elasticity” to add and remove capacity as needed. This seemed to be the most attractive aspect of the various approaches to cloud computing out there. VMware was mentioned a few times since some of the attendees were already using VMware for internal provisioning and could easily imagine an “elastic” scenario if VMware were also available in the cloud in a way that would allow application provisioning to be seamless across internal and external hosts.
This brought the discussion back to the programming model, as in what would you have to do (if anything) to your applications to enable this kind of elasticity in depoyment?
Cloud sites offering various bits of “functionality” typically also offer a specific programming model for that functionality (again Google App Engine and Force.com are examples, as is Microsoft’s Azure). The Microsoft folks in the room said that a future version of Azure would include the entire SQL Server, to help support the goal of reusing existing applications (which a lot of customers apparently have been asking about).
The fact that cloud computing services may constrain what an application can do, raises the question of whether we should be thinking about developing applications specifically for the cloud.
The controversy about cloud computing standards was noted, but we did not spend much time on it. The common wisdom comments were made about being too early for standards, and about the various proposals lacking major vendor backing, and we moved on.
We did spend some time talking about security, and service level agreements, and it was suggested that certain types of applications might be better suited to deployment in the cloud than others, especially as these issues get sorted out. For example, company phonebook applications don’t typically have the same availability and security requirements that a stock trading or medical records processing application might have.
Certification would be another significant sign of cloud computing maturity, meaning certification for certain of the service level agreements companies look for in transactional applications.
And who does the data in the cloud belong to? What if the cloud is physically hosted in a different country? Legal issues may dictate data belonging to citizens of a given country be physically stored within the geographical boundary of that country.
And what about proximity of data to its processing? Jim Gray‘s research was cited to say that it’s always cheaper to compute where the data is than to move the data around in order to process it.
Speaking of sending data around, however, what’s the real difference between moving data between the cloud and a local data center, and moving data between a company’s remote data center?
And finally, this meeting was my first experience with a fishbowl style session. We used four chairs, and it seemed to work well. This is also sometimes called the “anti-meeting” style of meeting, and seems a little like a “user-generated content” style of meeting. No formal PPT. At the end everyone said they had learned a lot and enjoyed the discussion. So apparently it worked!
Stay tuned for news of our next IASA NE meeting.