Thanks for sharing. You can also share your ideas for free on www.echofavor.com
Gmail Services Global Outage
71–80 of 175 posts
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#72Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please, please stop using mono space for quotes. It’s hard to read on small screens. Just > is better.
Why not use italics instead? How does the ">" help? You can put it at the beginning of the paragraph, but lines get re-flowed so you can't put it at the beginning of lines.
The > was the original (?) convention for email.
But seriously HN should just allow basic quotes. And, while they are at it, increase the size of voting arrows to make it possible to reliably hit them on mobile. I get it’s somewhat nice to have a site that does not constantly redesign everything, but pretending you lost the password for the server is just overdoing it in the opposite direction.
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#74Semi-related, but can anyone suggest good open source email client? I'm working on several computers with macos/linux and Gmail isn't slow only on my deep learning rig, so I'm looking for something to replace it.
I've been happily using Thunderbird for 10+ years. Supports Windows, Mac, and Linux natively. https://www.thunderbird.net
I recently encountered a bug, where the global search has stopped working (Ctrl+K). I have tried most of the remedies suggested and have it semi-working i.e. partial results. This has somewhat stolen a bit of thunder from an otherwise flawless client for my use-case.
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are the main factors that could lead to such a situation?
From the first SRE book [1]: "The error budget stems from the observation that 100% is the wrong reliability target for basically everything (pacemakers and anti-lock brakes being notable exceptions). In general, for any software service or system, 100% is not the right reliability target because no user can tell the difference between a system being 100% available and 99.999% available. There are many other systems…
We don't tolerate houses collapsing out of nowhere, brakes failing over the course of normal usage and planes falling out of the sky during routine flights.
But for some reason, we HAVE TO tolerate software crapping itself once a year?
I don't accept this logic. This is just a sign of how sloppy the industry has become.
This is the reason your phone becomes obsolete after 2 years, whereas your car can continue to run after multiple decades of abuse.
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#76Global does not mean "affecting absolutely everyone around the globe (or disc, for the flatearthers out there)". Affecting a "significant subset of users" that are spread around every continent is global and it shows it's not one specific DC, link, or ISP that was affected. The fact that you didn't experience the disruption means absolutely nothing and it's ridiculous to even suggest it does. Especially since there a…
Global outage implies everyone on the planet. Outages globally would imply what you've stated.
Someone's in a really pedantic mood today. The real life use of the expression contradicts your personal definition (try googling it and tell me what you come up with). It is widely used in reporting and accepted by everyone who's not in the mood to argue personal definitions.
Then again... Schrodinger's outage. Until everyone checks some people are not affected. Hence, never global. Right?
But honestly now, are you upset because of the semantics or because of the flatearther joke? ;)
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#77Global does not mean "affecting absolutely everyone around the globe (or disc, for the flatearthers out there)". Affecting a "significant subset of users" that are spread around every continent is global and it shows it's not one specific DC, link, or ISP that was affected. The fact that you didn't experience the disruption means absolutely nothing and it's ridiculous to even suggest it does. Especially since there a…
I bet you're fun at parties.
[deleted]
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the first SRE book [1]: "The error budget stems from the observation that 100% is the wrong reliability target for basically everything (pacemakers and anti-lock brakes being notable exceptions). In general, for any software service or system, 100% is not the right reliability target because no user can tell the difference between a system being 100% available and 99.999% available. There are many other systems…
We don't tolerate houses collapsing out of nowhere, brakes failing over the course of normal usage and planes falling out of the sky during routine flights. But for some reason, we HAVE TO tolerate software crapping itself once a year? I don't accept this logic. This is just a sign of how sloppy the industry has become. This is the reason your phone becomes obsolete after 2 years, whereas your car can continue to run…
First: We’re not talking about “out of nowhere” or during “routine” operation. Doing better than 99.99% uptime implies robustness to even extreme, unusual situations.
Second: Air travel could be much, much cheaper if it didn’t have to be nearly 100% reliable. This would be the right trade-off to make in almost any application that doesn’t almost guarantee deaths when it fails.
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the first SRE book [1]: "The error budget stems from the observation that 100% is the wrong reliability target for basically everything (pacemakers and anti-lock brakes being notable exceptions). In general, for any software service or system, 100% is not the right reliability target because no user can tell the difference between a system being 100% available and 99.999% available. There are many other systems…
We don't tolerate houses collapsing out of nowhere, brakes failing over the course of normal usage and planes falling out of the sky during routine flights. But for some reason, we HAVE TO tolerate software crapping itself once a year? I don't accept this logic. This is just a sign of how sloppy the industry has become. This is the reason your phone becomes obsolete after 2 years, whereas your car can continue to run…
I think this is a false equivalency. If we're talking about "service unavailability", planes break all the time. Houses have to be vacated because of flooding, fire, insect infestation. Brakes do fail. Just like with software, we accept a certain level of risk in exchange for cost/convenience efficiencies (e.g. we don't want our planes to fall out of the sky, but we're okay with getting stranded in phoenix for 24 hours because of a busted landing gear).
Re: Gmail Services Global Outage
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the first SRE book [1]: "The error budget stems from the observation that 100% is the wrong reliability target for basically everything (pacemakers and anti-lock brakes being notable exceptions). In general, for any software service or system, 100% is not the right reliability target because no user can tell the difference between a system being 100% available and 99.999% available. There are many other systems…
We don't tolerate houses collapsing out of nowhere, brakes failing over the course of normal usage and planes falling out of the sky during routine flights. But for some reason, we HAVE TO tolerate software crapping itself once a year? I don't accept this logic. This is just a sign of how sloppy the industry has become. This is the reason your phone becomes obsolete after 2 years, whereas your car can continue to run…
We wouldn't tolerate those things if we all used the one plane, car and house. That's where this comparison falls down.