AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific) • Hacker News Board

Amazon yet again lying to it's customers about the status of the service is the only real issue I see here>. Services fail, it's a fact of life but at least admit it's broken and that the issue is being fixed instead of blatantly lying and saying minor disruptions.

Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)

#15

Post by autotune » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 7:41 PM UTC

What happened to that 99.99% availability? Either way this just got posted at reddit.com/r/sysadmin which might be useful to some for tracking error rate: https://pulse.turbobytes.com/results/55c8751aecbe400bf80005f...

Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)

#16

Post by KenCochrane » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 7:43 PM UTC

From Amazon:

"Hello, We have just become aware of EC2 network connectivity issues in the US-EAST-1 region. The impact of this issue is loss of network connectivity to EC2 instances in US-EAST-1. The AWS support and engineering teams are actively working on bringing closure to this issue. I will share additional information as soon as I learn more about this issue."

Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)

#17

Post by ceejayoz » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 7:43 PM UTC

autotune wrote: post #15

What happened to that 99.99% availability? Either way this just got posted at reddit.com/r/sysadmin which might be useful to some for tracking error rate: https://pulse.turbobytes.com/results/55c8751aecbe400bf80005f...

Their SLA guarantees 99.9% on a monthly basis. The 99.99% mentioned on the product page isn't guaranteed at all.

As for what happened, my money is on this: https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2015/08/amazon-s3...

> You can now increase your Amazon S3 bucket limit per AWS account... Amazon S3 now supports read-after-write consistency for new objects added to Amazon S3 in US Standard region.

The 100 bucket limit used to be an absolute, unchangeable hard limit - rare for AWS and thus likely something deep in the architecture from S3 being one of their first services - so I suspect the lifting of that limit involved some fairly major changes to the backend.

Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)

#18

Post by Negitivefrags » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 7:44 PM UTC

I'm risking being inflammatory here, but do people really believe that they get better uptime from AWS compared to renting dedicated servers?

I feel like AWS has way too many moving parts to be stable.

It's very tempting for them to reuse bits of infrastructure everywhere which increases the chances that if something goes wrong somewhere it will break your stuff. So for example, hosting instance images on S3 means that when S3 has issues, now EC2 has issues.

Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)

#19

Post by arturhoo » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 7:47 PM UTC

We had problems while connecting to S3 standard US region from us-east-1 at 19UTC but it was solved 20 minutes later.

edit: seeing connectivity issues again at 19h50UTC

Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)

#20

Post by StabbyCutyou » Mon, Aug 10, 2015, 7:48 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #17

autotune wrote: post #15

What happened to that 99.99% availability? Either way this just got posted at reddit.com/r/sysadmin which might be useful to some for tracking error rate: https://pulse.turbobytes.com/results/55c8751aecbe400bf80005f...

Their SLA guarantees 99.9% on a monthly basis. The 99.99% mentioned on the product page isn't guaranteed at all. As for what happened, my money is on this: https://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2015/08/amazon-s3... > You can now increase your Amazon S3 bucket limit per AWS account... Amazon S3 now supports read-after-write consistency for new objects added to Amazon S3 in US Standard region. The 100 bucket limit…

They actually would let you increase that, but only up to a certain point and only if you specifically requested it. I don't see them mention the absolute ceiling being lifted, so that is probably still in place somewhere.

I'd wager it's more likely that read-after-write change.