It’s like all you people forgot how much shit broke before AWS. They have one major outage every few years and people lose their shit pretending they aren’t hitting the SLA or coming close.
Comment on Load bearing Tupperware
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 3 weeks ago
I laugh every time AWS goes down. That’s what you fucking get, and don’t get me started on us-east-1 specifically.
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
naught101@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Because hosting was more diverse before, so when shit happened it took out a couple of sites, not a quarter of the internet
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
And? God forbid we touch grass for 6 hours a year.
AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
The outage also took down people’s banks, which stopped many of them from doing things like buying groceries 💀
I don’t think saying it’s good for us “touching grass” is a good argument here when AWS hosts such a substantial portion of all online services.
tomiant@piefed.social 3 weeks ago
“Outages are a GOOD THING!” / FOX talking head
lengau@midwest.social 3 weeks ago
I touch grass every day. I want to do it on my own terms, not Amazon’s.
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 3 weeks ago
Yeah, when I can’t access my bank account the first thing I do is “touch grass.” 🥴
balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one 3 weeks ago
Some of us have jobs. I mean I guess you have a job, but in your case losing network just means those pesky humans stop bothering you and go to a real therapist.
naught101@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Agree. That’s not related to the point I was responding to though…
mitram2@lemmy.pt 3 weeks ago
It’s pretty funny to argue in favour of centralised services in a decentralised platform
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I never argued that. I provided the reality of what they did. I’m sorry the reality doesn’t align with how you think things should be.
You think everyone trying to make money is just stupid and has ignored some super reliable and cheap hosting because they want to gobble bezos cock? No, they solved challenging problems and made it a lot easier to stand up a reliable app.
balance8873@lemmy.myserv.one 3 weeks ago
Very unique take on how businesses make technical decisions. I’ve never heard of anyone describe the decision making process as logical before. Or even grounded in facts.
mitram2@lemmy.pt 3 weeks ago
I feel that you’re are very jaded over this subject, I truly felt it was a funny situation. No judgement from me
Yes, AWS has a lot of advantages and I do believe they usually provide a reliable service, but as with all centralised services when they go down a bunch of other stuff go with them and that should be avoided. Doesn’t make all the incredible engineers currently working in AWS stupid
shalafi@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
No shit. I was DevOps at my last company and they were all in on AWS. In those 5 years we had one major outage. There was one other case of a particular service going down, forgot which one, but it mainly screwed DevOps and the db guys.
You’re talking to a bunch of young people who hate Bezos and by extension AWS. They have no idea what the internet was like before.
Personally I think the cost is outrageous, rather have my own hardware mirrored in geographically distant colos, but that doesn’t mean AWS isn’t amazing.
wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
The problem is not that any outage occurred. This still happens often. Things just refuse to work sometimes. The issue is that SO MANY eggs were in ONE basket.
phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
Eeehh, you’re literally suggesting that AWS added to the general stability and dependability of the internet in general
You have NO idea what you’re talking about
shalafi@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
The centralization is an issue, but AWS is stable as hell. When I was first in IT, tech support, I had to explain to customers daily that, “No, your internet is fine, it’s just that particular website that’s down.”
And the centralization wouldn’t be a thing if AWS didn’t route all IAM services through us-east-1. My Lightsail in us-west-1 was fine yesterday.
phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
So your argument is that AWS centralization is good because Amazon is a good provider?
You do understand that they’re are loads of providers out there that are perfectly stable, but that are not Amazon?
I’ve never used it because I know how to manage a server, something you might want to expect from IT personnel that does development for companies, but there days let’s just ask Amazon todo it for us, we’re too lazy
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Yeah rack space was killing it!
phoenixz@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
You understand that that has nothing to do with this? So there are shitty providers out there, find a good one that is not “just amazon”
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 3 weeks ago
Once per year? I had outages much more often than that on AWS.
CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Nah. I haven’t had a service we use miss an SLA or cost more than it’s SLO budget in 2 years.
What specific services have they missed your SLA on and what incidents were they tied to? I understand that not every team has a guy on their team to monitor that that stuff and bitch for credits, but I do, and AWS is one of our most reliable vendors.
Look the fact that AWS, Azure, and more recently Google are the only choices sucks.
But the reality is most companies and projects don’t have the business case to justify multi region fail over much less vendor fail over. They are all built on single points of failures and will always have outages.
Everyone just notices it more when it’s AWS. And that’s a stupid reason to base decisions off of. Visa/mc was working. Reddit and Facebook were mostly working once they started routing through their multi cloud nodes. Maybe you couldn’t get to your banks web app, that’s on them using a single cloud with no way to route to alternate cloud nodes and services. And for them to double at best infrastructure costs, unless they are boa Chase Morgan etc, is dumb for 99.99% which is the SLA .
The world isn’t ending, emergency services are working, visa/mc failed over, I was still on Reddit and slack most of the day. It wasn’t the end of the world.
Anyway, I now realize I have summoned my frustrations with this entire thread and gone wildly off topic and ranted with full force at you.
I just don’t think it’s important that when there is a major outage on AWS/Azure/cloud flare. It was going to happen elsewhere, and you wouldn’t have an excuse to tell your pm not my problem, instead of digging into your app for 2 hours to find out x portion of you very distributed vendor list failed and you still have a single point of failure. I’d rather be able to point to AWS, say shit is fucked for everyone, and if you want multi cloud it’s going to cost at least 1.5x as much as we’re spending 🤷♂️.
undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 3 weeks ago
I haven’t used AWS in years. No IPv6 support in S3 in 2017 was the last straw for me. I have to deal with it at work (sometimes) and always laugh when they introduce “new” features like HTTPS records in Route53 like two years late.
icelimit@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
Actually can you start? Feels like an interesting talking point