Earlier quoted context omitted.
What tool is that?
http://www.appneta.com/products/traceview/
Thanks
AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
41–50 of 59 posts
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#42The us-east-1 region gets treated differently than all other regions by AWS. Part of the reason it gets treated differently it is the default, and hence the most popular. It also doesn't help that it is on the east coast, and experiences more weather. For the above reasons, and that I work in the SF bay area, I put everything in us-west-2. us-west-2 sometimes has it's own issues, but nothing quite at the level of us-…
East1 is absurdly huge, isn't it? I saw statements to the effect that its nearly 60% of AWS's capacity.
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#43We saw a short burst of 503s a short while ago, but we have not seen any since. Hopefully we do not see any more though. Also, for the record, S3 has been very stable for us otherwise. We have been rather happy with AWS overall.
Same, though just as I write this we see another spike of errors.
Ok, no 503s but just got a very small burst of 500s,
"com.amazonaws.services.s3.model.AmazonS3Exception: Status Code: 500, AWS Service: Amazon S3, AWS Request ID: -redacted-, AWS Error Code: InternalError, AWS Error Message: We encountered an internal error. Please try again., S3 Extended Request ID: -redacted-"
:/
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#44I'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 th…
AWS is so massive that even when 0.1% of the customers are having problems, it is huge news like this. The reality is most customers are not affected, and overall service uptime is highest anywhere around. Not to mention that whenever AWS is having issues it's always in one region at a time, and frequently a single availability zone. As long as you build your application to be AZ-tolerant, you won't run into problems…
I avoid almost all of these snafus simply by not putting anything in Virginia.
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#45I'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 th…
Yes, your comment is unneccessarily inflammatory, in case you're wondering why I'm downvoting you. Nobody in this thread has made any comments about their uptime expectations before you brought up the subject. There's no sign here of the "people" you are referring to.
It's inflammatory to ask a question that is no doubt is some people's minds at times like this?
It's not inflammatory to ask a question that people are no doubt thinking, even if the answer is obvious.
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#46I'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 th…
Uptime, probably. At best, I'd get equal (no I wouldn't, but for sake of discussion), but it'd cost me several orders of magnitude more, in terms of redundancy, security infrastructure, etc
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#47Indeed. As I write this we're in the midst of our third S3 outage of the day. The past two were eventually documented on the AWS Service Dashboard. The latest one has not yet received its tiny status icon to indicate an outage.
It's one thing that S3 keeps going down today; we run our own server cluster and I accept that 100% uptime isn't possible. But it's aggravating that they can't at least figure out how to give timely updates on their dashboard when something is broken.
We inevitably learn of S3 outages through our internal error reporting systems before AWS posts it to their status page. When they do finally post, it is usually a tiny "information" icon, even when reporting a problem that makes the service unusable. The laggy, misleading nature of their status page gives the impression they must be tying bonuses to the status icons. Can't fathom why else they would be so inept when it comes to keeping us updated when something is wrong. Surely they have sufficient internal monitoring to pick up on these outages long before they update their customers.
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#48I'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 th…
AWS is so massive that even when 0.1% of the customers are having problems, it is huge news like this. The reality is most customers are not affected, and overall service uptime is highest anywhere around. Not to mention that whenever AWS is having issues it's always in one region at a time, and frequently a single availability zone. As long as you build your application to be AZ-tolerant, you won't run into problems…
> As long as you build your application to be AZ-tolerant, you won't run into problems.
And the perfect "out" for AWS, every single time they have issues.
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#49I'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 th…
Not to mention the 'moving parts' are all closed source.
Re: AWS S3 Having Problems Again? (Monday 12PM Pacific)
#50Interesting this article was bumped from the front page so quickly. Makes you wonder...