Live data from Hacker News

Dear Heroku: Quit blaming all of us when you fail. Do this instead…

blog.pardner.com

11–20 of 139 posts

Re: Dear Heroku: Quit blaming all of us when you fail. Do this instead…

#11
post #8

Heroku has a mechanism for displaying custom error and maintenance pages, served off of S3. https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/error-pages#customize_...

The earlier Heroku outage also brought down custom error pages. Our site was only displaying a 500 server error via nginx.

Re: Dear Heroku: Quit blaming all of us when you fail. Do this instead…

#12
Why do you care? Do you think this helps your customer at all?

Perhaps you're worried about your technical reputation. All you're doing is moving the blame to some part of your code to the decision you made to host on Heroku.

Down is down. Unavailable is unavailable. To your customers that's all that matters.

For what it's worth I think hosting on Heroku makes plenty of sense and I'm actually moving my app (Crisply) to Heroku so that my technical team spends less time writing chef scripts, less time managing database clusters and more time adding value. But when Heroku goes down my customers will be just as screwed.

Re: Dear Heroku: Quit blaming all of us when you fail. Do this instead…

#13

Why do you care? Do you think this helps your customer at all? Perhaps you're worried about your technical reputation. All you're doing is moving the blame to some part of your code to the decision you made to host on Heroku. Down is down. Unavailable is unavailable. To your customers that's all that matters. For what it's worth I think hosting on Heroku makes plenty of sense and I'm actually moving my app (Crisply)…

[deleted]

Re: Dear Heroku: Quit blaming all of us when you fail. Do this instead…

#14

Why do you care? Do you think this helps your customer at all? Perhaps you're worried about your technical reputation. All you're doing is moving the blame to some part of your code to the decision you made to host on Heroku. Down is down. Unavailable is unavailable. To your customers that's all that matters. For what it's worth I think hosting on Heroku makes plenty of sense and I'm actually moving my app (Crisply)…

Well said; I'd even take it a step further and say that your customers (unless your customers are technical folks) have absolutely no idea about the distinction anyway. Saying that it's hosted on Heroku means nothing to them.

Moreover, there may be companies hosting on Heroku who insist that the service is "white label" for any number of reasons; forcing something like onto them would devalue Heroku to those companies.

Re: Dear Heroku: Quit blaming all of us when you fail. Do this instead…

#16
If we put our normal-user-hat on for a minute: I don't see how that would make any difference for 90%+ of users. They'll see the website isn't working, but another site is, so your site is broken. End of story.

(With my developer hat on, Heroku outages are fun: our internal switchboard at http://www.pagerduty.com lights up like a christmas tree)

Re: Dear Heroku: Quit blaming all of us when you fail. Do this instead…

#20

Why do you care? Do you think this helps your customer at all? Perhaps you're worried about your technical reputation. All you're doing is moving the blame to some part of your code to the decision you made to host on Heroku. Down is down. Unavailable is unavailable. To your customers that's all that matters. For what it's worth I think hosting on Heroku makes plenty of sense and I'm actually moving my app (Crisply)…

Frankly, I believe it certainly can matter. It may not make any difference to all clients, but some will draw a distinction between avoidable / unavoidable downtime.

Rational clients understand they are not hiring demigods or living in some uptime utopia. However, they expect their service providers to adhere to best practices and make logical decisions.

In this case it's Heroku, in another setting it might be a NetApp filer. Both are reasonable solutions in their appropriate environment, yet both may fail. There's a significant difference between downtime caused by the failure of a reasonably trusted solution as opposed to that due to design flaws, bleeding edge prototyping and flat out bad decisions. The former wouldn't undermine my faith in a service provider, while the latter certainly might.

Post reply on HN