We were affected but it’s blog posts like these that make me never want to move away. Everyone makes mistakes. Everyone has bad days. It’s how you react afterwards that makes the difference.
The issue is when you start having bad days every other day though. We use and depend on CloudFlare Images heavily, it has now been down more than 67 hours over the last 30 days (22h on October 9th, 42h Nov 2 - Nov 4 and a sprinkle of ~hour long outages in between). That's 90.6% availability over the last month.
Transparency is a great differentiator between providers that are fighting in the 99.9% availability range, but when you are hanging on for dear life to stay above the one 9 availability, it doesn't matter.
Similar story for GCP.
All three of them had decades of institutional knowledge and procedures in place around running big services by the time Cloudflare was founded.
No, even at the onset AWS was an entirely-from-the-ground-up build. The only thing it could even be argued to sit on top of was the extremely crufty VMs and physical loadbalancers from the original Prod at that point, and those things were not doing anybody any favors.
I really appreciate that they're going to fix the process errors here. But as they suggested, there's a tension between moving fast and being sure. This is typically managed like the weather, buying rain jackets afterwards (not optimal). I'd be curious to see how they can make reliability part of the culture without tying development up in process.
Perhaps they can model the system in software, then use traffic analytics to validate their models. If they can lower the cost of reliability experiments by doing virtual experiments, they might be able to catch more before roll-out.
Disagree completely, it's the frank detail that makes me trust their story.
Has Flexential provided a similarly detailed, public root cause analysis? If so, maybe we can refer to it. If not, how do you expect us to read it?
Imagine if the literal power company failed, and took days to tell people what was going on. You can see why people are reading the postmortem that exists, rather than the one that doesn't.
They do both. They stated what their problem was and they stated their due diligence in picking a DC
> While the PDX-04’s design was certified Tier III before construction and is expected to provide high availability SLAs
They said the core issue: innovating fast, which led to not requiring in the high availability cluster.
Which is also a fix.
From cloudflare 's POV, part of what made it originally worse, is the lack of communication by the DC.
Which is an issue, if you want to inform clients.