Amazon was Down • Hacker News Board

Re: Amazon was Down

#101

Post by philwelch » Mon, Apr 22, 2013, 11:49 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #100

philwelch wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tumblr and Twitter have orders of magnitude fewer users than Amazon.

Seeing that Twitter has 500 million users, an order of magnitude more would be in the range of 5 billion, and a second order of magnitude would be around 50 billion. So I seriously doubt Amazon has "orders of magnitude more users" that Twitter. For Tumblr, maybe, but I doubt that too (maybe just one order of magnitude for it). Besides, all that's orthogonal to my point. Except if you mean that the reason that Twitter…

Twitter has much better uptime than it used to, too.

When you get in the hundreds of millions of users, you've run out of early adopters and end up with users who are a little more demanding about uptime.

Re: Amazon was Down

#102

Post by crucifiction » Tue, Apr 23, 2013, 3:20 AM UTC

nevir wrote: post #92

frehpt wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incorrect, Amazon.com runs on AWS: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5588012

AWS tech maybe, but you can be pretty assured that the data centers (or at least networks) are are almost completely segregated.

Nope, its all mixed outside of software segregation.

Re: Amazon was Down

#103

Post by scottbruin » Wed, Apr 24, 2013, 9:30 AM UTC

ceol wrote: post #36

gry wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heroku is up: http://cl.ly/image/0B0U1K3Z342R . Conversely, when AWS had issues, Amazon.com was not impacted. Amazon.com != AWS. I'm curious to know when AWS or Amazon.com innovations impact each other, or which one leads. I'd rather it be Amazon.com.

I think the gp was saying that the brand — as in, the perception of AWS— will suffer, not the actual services. Anyone with an ounce of server knowledge would know it's impossible to keep a website up for 100% of the time, so downtime at Amazon is understandable, but maybe the average Joe Manager is deciding between Rackspace and AWS and happens to visit amazon.com during this downtime. "If Amazon can't even keep thei…

> Anyone with an ounce of server knowledge would know it's impossible to keep a website up for 100% of the time

As far as I know Google has 100% uptime, so it's not impossible. May not be 100% for every geographical location but that's partly because of things Google cannot control nor make redundant.