Live data from Hacker News

AWS down again?

aws.amazon.com

131–140 of 257 posts

Re: AWS down again?

#131
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An our on premise linux server recently reached an uptime of 1000 days. Yes, days.

Do you not patch your servers? Or you don't need reboot for Linux devices?

Can't speak to their particular config, but at least LivePatch for Ubuntu can apply most updates without the need to restart.

Re: AWS down again?

#132

I expect better of the community here. All it takes is a chance to take a cheap shot at one of the “big boys” and then all of a sudden the weasels come scampering out of the wood work. Seriously, those commenting “oh boy! Time to rethink this whole cloud thing!” You’re either so new to this stuff to have no experience to remember the days before cloud, you’re trolling because you’re high on nostalgia remembering the…

Well at least you said please, however: I have built and run my own infrastructure from the ground up, and I've been made to transition to the cloud. The experience hasn't been great. It may simply be sour 'grapes' because, after all the expertise a whole generation has built up learning UNIX, and all the internet protocols (DNS, ARP, Email, reading RFCs, networking, routing) we get told that all that old stuff is ju…

That's an interesting position to take, because I imagine if a team of developers decided to invent the internet in a vacuum today, it'd be a hell of a lot more secure than the "let's hope nobody uses this protocol maliciously" attitude prevalent in the early days of the internet.

Not that that is a bad thing, but just something to think about.

Re: AWS down again?

#133
post #70

Anyone feel like Big Tech outages are happening more frequently recently? In recent months, we’ve seen Amazon Web Services, Facebook, Gmail, and Twitter go down. Are we at the point where the people who maintain the infrastructure are now completely different than the ones who built it, and are struggling to keep it running because they don’t understand it as well?

I was thinking something similar. The FAANG interview has been optimized to punish candidates with actual experience in these problems in favor of those that can solve leetcode problems and regurgitate design architectures from youtube. This filters out a lot of engineers with grit that can actually work through tough real world (IT) problems.

I don't even work at FAANG but even we have our own in-house grown compute platforms with layers and layers of abstractions and enormous complexity which were built over several years by hundreds of engineers. These don't resemble public cloud or open source solutions at all, ideas are similar at best. You can have a lot of real world small company knowledge but the moment you walk through the door this experience is worthless, all that counts is how fast you can adapt and how good your understanding of the basics is.

Look at some of the code that was open sourced by Yahoo years ago. Other large engineering organizations today have technology which far exceeds the complexity of what was made public by Yahoo a decade ago. Unfortunately Yahoo is pretty much the only example of a large company open sourcing big portions of their platform code.

Re: AWS down again?

#134
post #76
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you rather have to fix your own data center, or wait 4 hours. AWS works 99% of the time,plus it's someone else's problem

In my industry, five nines is the starting level. You're proposing something 1,000 times worse.

If you have to have 5 9's starting with any cloud service is pretty tough sell at this point. You can build that type of system ontop of them. But it takes a willingness to also build your own and use competing services adding even more complexity. The BYO or competing services bit is so you can keep the lights on even when the cloud eats it, not if. Part of 5 9's is planning for catastrophic failure. Things like 'what if the load balancer/router/backhaul/dns burns out, you have a spare on hand? Then what happens to services where you had them sticky?' Even then what if both the primary and secondary are out? What then? Lots of planning and making sure you know what to do when each of those cases happen.

The nice bit though is many services can go down. Yeah it stings a bit (money, reputation, time, etc). But overall it is not that big of deal.

But for the places where you can not go down. Tons of planning and tons of backup plans with backup plans, and a different style of producing code.

Re: AWS down again?

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well at least you said please, however: I have built and run my own infrastructure from the ground up, and I've been made to transition to the cloud. The experience hasn't been great. It may simply be sour 'grapes' because, after all the expertise a whole generation has built up learning UNIX, and all the internet protocols (DNS, ARP, Email, reading RFCs, networking, routing) we get told that all that old stuff is ju…

Your own lack of knowledge about how to make the cloud work properly doesn't mean it's completely useless. The "old school" knowledge is still very useful in building and troubleshooting cloud-based infrastructure. You're creating a false dichotomy.

It doesn't sound like the "cloud" is working for anyone right now innit?

Re: AWS down again?

#136
post #21

I think this adds some momentum to the pendulum swinging back the other way. Maybe cloud teams can patch your services better than your in-house team can (See 2 critical issues in Azure the last 3 months, _caused_ by MS itself). Maybe the cloud has a higher uptime than your on-premise infrastructure (see the AWS, Azure outages). Make sure to compare the actual outage time v.s. the stats doctored by various political…

Even if you can manage more uptime on your own than through the cloud (which I doubt), being on the cloud means downtime is correlated with downtime of other services. That's usually a good thing. Your customers will be more understanding if your outage is part if a wider outage that makes national news. Any services you integrate with are likely down too. If two services with 99% uncorrelated uptime together drops t…

If you happen not to be on the major cloud platform where everybody is enjoying donwtimeshare, we provide you with some downtime monkeys that will pull the lever EXACTLY when your platform should go down!

Let no more have your integrations with systems in the cloud frustrate your customers when they are unreachable - let the news explain the downtime. JOIN the Downtime Umbrella NOW and receive 5 downtime lever pulls for FREE! /s

Re: AWS down again?

#137

I expect better of the community here. All it takes is a chance to take a cheap shot at one of the “big boys” and then all of a sudden the weasels come scampering out of the wood work. Seriously, those commenting “oh boy! Time to rethink this whole cloud thing!” You’re either so new to this stuff to have no experience to remember the days before cloud, you’re trolling because you’re high on nostalgia remembering the…

Well at least you said please, however: I have built and run my own infrastructure from the ground up, and I've been made to transition to the cloud. The experience hasn't been great. It may simply be sour 'grapes' because, after all the expertise a whole generation has built up learning UNIX, and all the internet protocols (DNS, ARP, Email, reading RFCs, networking, routing) we get told that all that old stuff is ju…

None of that stuff is legacy. It's just centralized. Economies of scale. Go work for an infrastructure provider, the same way recruiters largely work for recruiting firms instead of all shops having their own in-house.

The fact that the people who could invent the Internet mostly work for a few giants doesn't mean they no longer exist in the current generation.

Re: AWS down again?

#138
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even on HN there are some former AWS employees who talk about how its all stitched together and flying on a wing a prayer. Apparently the on-call is just a traumatizing experience. It will take real damage to revenue for the management to pay that debt off.

Is there a case of an organization ever paying off "tech debt" (I refuse the term, I call it incomplete software)? I've only ever seen it snowball until the product falls into the sea and they start again fresh.

I've never seen it. It's kind of like credit card debt. The people that have it get progressively more to pay off the previous debt until they reach bankruptcy.

So I do think tech debt is accurate, in that the average human deludes themselves into thinking they will pay it off at some point.

Re: AWS down again?

#139

Anyone feel like Big Tech outages are happening more frequently recently? In recent months, we’ve seen Amazon Web Services, Facebook, Gmail, and Twitter go down. Are we at the point where the people who maintain the infrastructure are now completely different than the ones who built it, and are struggling to keep it running because they don’t understand it as well?

I'd say the scale is the problem, not the people.

Every service you mentioned (maybe sans Gmail, the only additions I remember in the last twelve years are a new UI and Hangouts) has bolted on so many features over the last years: AWS was virtual machines + SDNs in the beginning as Amazon only intended to sell spare capacity on their own servers, now it's a global one-stop-shop for everything that can be done on the Internet. Facebook was a social media feed, now it's event coordination, groups, chat, image and media hosting at global scale.

And apparently, no one at these organizations ever thought about re-working their infrastructure with "lessons learned over the last decade" in mind. Every new feature was simply bolted on, on top of an infrastructure that was hardly even envisioned to ever become the scale they are today. And that sort of refactoring costs serious amounts of money and developer time, not to mention that it doesn't make sense to develop new features on a code base that's going to be shut down in a year, so management doesn't approve it out of a fear they will be "out-featured" by a competitor and cannot react (=copy, like Instagram's Stories that were a clear rip-off from Snapchat) in time or that their own PKI/OKR goals and with it their bonus payments won't get hit.

That mindset/scale issue is also why IBM mainframes are still so common, why travel PIRs seem to be stuck in formats over half a century old or why "put CSV files on an FTP server" is the standard on bank transfers... big corporate/government clients pay a shitload of money for virtualized mainframes on new hardware that still can run the 70s-era code and even more money for people able to speak COBOL, because that is still cheaper than the alternative - reworking everything from scratch on a modern foundation, testing data integrity and edge cases, revise interfaces to hundreds or thousands of clients. Hell, even Internet standards have the same problem... we are still using protocols like BGP that have been around since before I was born, and tacked on security only a few years ago after a couple of fat-finger incidents.

Modernization in such entities only tends to happen when laws or regulatory frameworks change, and then it can become a real shitshow for those at the lowest rungs of the IT ladder that have to implement them - simply take same-sex marriages and try to shoehorn them into a database that was labeled for "husband and wife", or trans/inter people with gender data represented by a boolean field.

Re: AWS down again?

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wha? We host everything on our hardware (which is nothing special) and haven't had any downtime in this year (yet). And we're just another run of the mill dev shop, very far from "superstars" who work on these (supposedly extremely stable) platforms.

Two questions I have regarding your in-house hardware: 1. How easy can I access your physical servers ? 2. What happens if there is a catastrophic failure, for example local power outage or a major flooding 3. How secure is your server? Are you regularly patching your operation systems 4. If I want to run a project that requires double the capacity of your current hardware for a specific project, how long is it going…

I'm running about 10 servers myself in production. They just do transcoding, so aren't mission-critical, but...

- Regularly patching is automated and took about 30 seconds to configure, using an automated script

Regarding running your own physical servers, that is a different ballgame, but for all of my projects, if I need to:

- I can pretty easily spin up VPSs / bare metal servers anywhere (netcup, linode, hetzner, etc) and provision there while I wait for new hardware to come in - If you want to double the capacity of your current hardware, you'll have to order it and wait, but it's cheap (vs the major cloud providers) to way over provision if you're running your own physical hardware, so you can pretty easily have 2-4x extra capacity and still come out with extra money in your pocket.

I host in the cloud, but I think people vastly over estimate how much it saves 90% of cloud customers.

Post reply on HN