Live data from Hacker News

Google outage – resolved

news.ycombinator.com

261–270 of 870 posts

Re: Google outage – resolved

#262

I feel like Google is having more outages recently. I worked there for 4 years and even in such a short time you really noticed the shift from engineering focus to business focus. But maybe it is just a coincidence.

I interviewed for Google many years ago and recently. The expectations fell through the floor.

I've see plots of number of employees too. I'm not sure how Google will dig itself out of that one.

Re: Google outage – resolved

#263
post #182

It's super interesting that all Google services that I've tried are down _except_ for Google Search. What would isolate Search from the rest of Google's products such that it wouldn't be affected by a mass outage like this?

It looks like it is related to authentication, landing pages seem to be working, so going incognito you can still use youtube. I would guess the search page does not actually use your credentials for anything since fingerprinting is separate from login?

I would've thought Google remembers what you search while logged in and sells it off. Maybe they do it in a different way - never really thought about that. I'm logged into Google when I search but my profile fails to load at the top right.

Re: Google outage – resolved

#267

And somehow Pokemon Go is down, too. They use GCP for hosting, but I'm not seeing other outages on GCP. Maybe they have deeper integration with Google's Cloud than publicly disclosed?

Discord was sort of down (wouldn't load), but I could log in again a few minutes later and everything was OK. My company's product is hosted on GCP and there are no problems that I can detect without administrative access (which I can't obtain because it's behind a Google login); services are returning correct results.

Re: Google outage – resolved

#269
post #24

Just checked https://www.google.com/appsstatus all green, which does not reflect reality for me (e.g. Gmail is down) edit: shows how incredibly difficult introspection is

Someone here in hn said at Amazon AWS they are required direct CTO approvals to reflect negative realities. Maybe that’s the case for anyone these days.

Not true. Only for written things like postmortems. Automated systems need to be vetted but can update things like status pages on their own.

The issue isn't "negative" realities, it is saying something while investigating that might break contracts only to find later that it wasn't true.

Post reply on HN