61–70 of 106 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We were hit by it over the weekend, and because of our failsafes, our customers didn't notice a thing. Stuff happens. It's our job to prepare for these things as well.
Curious to know what kind of failsafes you have in place so your customers were not impacted?
https://12factor.net/ can help guide
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We were hit by it over the weekend, and because of our failsafes, our customers didn't notice a thing. Stuff happens. It's our job to prepare for these things as well.
Curious to know what kind of failsafes you have in place so your customers were not impacted?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
agree. like you imply, too many people rely heavily on their providers for business critical things like backups and redundancy. while generally big providers to a good job at this (and aws certainly does a good job at this), it does not mean there is a guarantee of any kind failures won't ever occur. thus the need to heavily invest in failure resistant technologies upon this borrowed infrastructure is arguably more…
But the reason I pay AWS is so that I don't have to hire a team to take care of backups and redundancy on my side. If they can't be relied on, a lot of the justification for their cost markup goes out the window.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
agree. like you imply, too many people rely heavily on their providers for business critical things like backups and redundancy. while generally big providers to a good job at this (and aws certainly does a good job at this), it does not mean there is a guarantee of any kind failures won't ever occur. thus the need to heavily invest in failure resistant technologies upon this borrowed infrastructure is arguably more…
But the reason I pay AWS is so that I don't have to hire a team to take care of backups and redundancy on my side. If they can't be relied on, a lot of the justification for their cost markup goes out the window.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the reason I pay AWS is so that I don't have to hire a team to take care of backups and redundancy on my side. If they can't be relied on, a lot of the justification for their cost markup goes out the window.
It can be relied on, but it's up to you to configure it properly. AWS has no way of knowing how critical your application is and what level of redundancy it needs, and this has cost implications so they can't do it automatically.
I remember somebody on here writing out how when they worked at AWS they wrote custom firmware for their generators to get max performance.
I couldn't find the HN post but I found an article that talks about firmware mods they do. https://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2017/04/07/how-... > The piece of technology Amazon designed to avoid this type of outage is the firmware that decides what electrical switchgear should do when a data center loses utility power. Typical vendor firmware prioritizes preventing damage to expensive backup generators ove…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can be relied on, but it's up to you to configure it properly. AWS has no way of knowing how critical your application is and what level of redundancy it needs, and this has cost implications so they can't do it automatically.
I'm pretty sure that RDS is EBS-backed.
This seems to be getting slightly overblown in that thread. To be clear, this impacted one datacenter out of ten that make up one availability zone out of six in AWS’s us-east-1 region. So we are talking 2-3% at most of that region’s capacity was impacted. I haven’t seen a report yet on exactly why their generator failed, but from what I’ve heard, the power failed, and the backup generator kicked in and ran fine for…
Some AWS services can't span across multiple availability zones like EMR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
agree. like you imply, too many people rely heavily on their providers for business critical things like backups and redundancy. while generally big providers to a good job at this (and aws certainly does a good job at this), it does not mean there is a guarantee of any kind failures won't ever occur. thus the need to heavily invest in failure resistant technologies upon this borrowed infrastructure is arguably more…
But the reason I pay AWS is so that I don't have to hire a team to take care of backups and redundancy on my side. If they can't be relied on, a lot of the justification for their cost markup goes out the window.