Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 646 posts

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#211

Post by iso1631 »

f6v wrote: post #202
RONROC wrote: post #154

The prevailing wisdom throughout the last couple of years was: “ditch your on-prem infrastructure and migrate to a major cloud provider” And its starting to seem like it could be something like: “ditch your on-prem infrastructure and spin up your own managed cloud” This is probably untenable for larger orgs where convenience gets the blank check treatment, but for smaller operations that can’t realize that value at s…

Self-managed infrastructure doesn’t fail now?

Not at this rate.

I remember we had a power outage in 2006, it actually took one of my services off air. Since then of course that has been rectified, and the loss of a building wouldn't impact on any of the critical, essential or important services I provide.

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#212

Post by sdevonoes »

Hippocrates wrote: post #198

Every time a major cloud provider has an outage, Infra people and execs cry foul and say we need to move to . But does anyone really have an objective measure of how clouds stack up reliability-wise? I doubt it, since outages and their effects are nuanced. The other move is that they want to go multi-cloud... But I’ve been involved in enough multi-cloud initiatives to know how much time and effort those soak up, not…

Perhaps is us, the customers (and our customers, and the customers of our customers, ...), the ones who should get used to the status of "things can go wrong"? Except for some specific scenarios (medical-related stuff, for instance), if my favourite online shopping place is down, well, it's down, I'll buy later.

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#213

Post by gilrain »

junon wrote: post #127
isoprophlex wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you imagine that some might see your position as one of unmitigated pedantry unfitting in any discussion of this - clearly jocular - website?

Nope. Because these laws also protect people who make such websites from the corporations they're commenting on, too. The respect must be mutual, else e.g. OSS has no basis for legal protection, either. Being concerned for the proper respect of IP laws is something that benefits everyone.

You make more friends defending humans from big companies than you do defending big companies from humans.

Your argument would have a small amount of merit if you acknowledged that the laws DO NOT protect people like they do corporations. That is a hollow ideal, not reality.

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#215

Post by mijoharas »

Hippocrates wrote: post #198

Every time a major cloud provider has an outage, Infra people and execs cry foul and say we need to move to . But does anyone really have an objective measure of how clouds stack up reliability-wise? I doubt it, since outages and their effects are nuanced. The other move is that they want to go multi-cloud... But I’ve been involved in enough multi-cloud initiatives to know how much time and effort those soak up, not…

I mean from the explanation[0], assuming that is correct (I don't have evidence to suggest it's false) - you don't need to be multi-cloud, and you don't even need to be multi-region. As long as you're spread out over multiple availability zones in a region you should be resilient to this failure.

Somewhat surprising to see how many things are failing though, which implies, either that a lot of services aren't able to fail-over to a different availability zone, or there is something else going wrong.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29648992

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#216

Post by itsoktocry »

2-718-281-828 wrote: post #203
chkhd wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"When a fail-safe system fails, it fails by failing to fail-safe." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemantics

is that just playing with words?

>is that just playing with words?

It conveys reality, that "fail-safe" isn't literal, as if anyone believed that.

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#217

Post by vinay_ys »

aledalgrande wrote: post #133

If you haven't seen yet, news is it was a power loss: > 5:01 AM PST We can confirm a loss of power within a single data center within a single Availability Zone (USE1-AZ4) in the US-EAST-1 Region. This is affecting availability and connectivity to EC2 instances that are part of the affected data center within the affected Availability Zone. We are also experiencing elevated RunInstance API error rates for launches wi…

This is quite interesting as they claim their datacenter design does better than Uptime's Tier3+ design requirements which require redundant power supply paths. [https://aws.amazon.com/compliance/uptimeinstitute/]. I really hope they publish a thorough RCA for this incident.

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#218

Post by datavirtue »

trabant00 wrote: post #126
api wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody ever got fired for using AWS.

True sad fact. I first thought it is a management problem but lately I see it is the tech bros who push for fads in the hopes of staying relevant and not asuming responsability for choices.

Omg, this needs to be on a plaque or something.

"Let's move our internal app with 50 users to k8s in the cloud." --true story

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#219

Post by BiteCode_dev »

throwaway81523 wrote: post #27

Ok, enough AWS outages to say I'm tired of hearing about low end stuff being flaky.

"Don't use a self hosted monolithe, it's not reliable! You need a cloud FS with a load balancer under observability and your data in a db that scales horizontally, all orchestrated by kubs."

Meanwhile, I currently have a gig to work on a video service which features a never updated centos 6, an unsupported python 2 blob website, and a push to prod deployment procedure, running a single postgres db serving streaming for 4 millions users a month.

And it's got years of up time, cost 1/100th of AWS, and can be maintained by one dev.

Not saying "cloud is bad", but we got to stop screaming old techs are no good either.

Re: Tell HN: AWS appears to be down again

#220

Post by wallacoloo »

schnebbau wrote: post #25

So, how many execs are going to push to move to self-managed hosting in the new year? Packaging a way to migrate off AWS could be a unicorn idea.

AWS has its Outpost product for on-prem hosting. not 100% self-managed, but maybe enough to satisfy the execs and make your market a bit smaller.
Post reply on HN