Cloud Lift and Shift
Lift and shift (rehosting) moves workloads to Cloud with little or no redesign. We rate the pattern hold: do not start new migrations this way, and do not chase hyperscaler credits by cloning the same stack on AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud Platform. Prefer Hybrid Cloud: place each workload on the provider that fits, then bridge accounts securely.
Blurb
Lift and shift is a migration strategy that moves workloads to the cloud without redesigning the application architecture.
Summary
Two failure modes we see:
- Datacenter rehost (classic): VMs and pets move to cloud IaaS unchanged. Cost savings rarely materialize; you inherit cloud complexity without cloud-native ops (Cattle Not Pets, autoscaling, managed data planes).
- Credit-chasing portability theater: Teams re-create RDS-like, EKS-like, and blob storage on another cloud to burn startup credits, then pay egress and dual-run tax forever.
Why hold: lift-and-shift optimizes for short-term migration metrics, not operability. Stateful pets, hand-tuned networking, and proprietary managed-service mappings do not survive provider hops.
Do instead: greenfield on Google Cloud Platform where possible; Terraform and portable interfaces for what must move; refactor toward Containerization/Kubernetes and Software as a Service shapes; use Hybrid Cloud when multiple clouds are intentional, not accidental duplication.
Details
| Anti-pattern | Why it fails | Better direction |
|---|---|---|
| 1:1 service cloning across clouds | Highest cost, weakest differentiation | Pick best-of-breed per workload; document why it lives there |
| Migrating databases by dump/restore monthly | Downtime, drift, data egress bills | Managed replication, eventing, or stay put and strangle |
| “Same architecture everywhere” for compliance | Compliance follows controls, not SKU parity | Shared policy (DevSecOps, Policy as Code), different implementations |
| Lift VMs without autoscaling groups | Pay for peak 24/7 | Cattle Not Pets, instance templates, rightsizing |
| Chasing credits without TCO model | Credits expire; architecture remains | Model 3-year TCO including egress, support, and engineer time |
When rehost is acceptable: hard exit deadline from a datacenter, ISV appliance with no cloud-native path yet, or temporary landing zone with a written strangler plan and sunset date. Label it legacy containment, not the target architecture.
References
- Wikipedia: lift and shift
- Contrast: Hybrid Cloud (adopt) in this garden