Hacker News Reader

Comment by bwb | Hacker News Reader

Honestly, downtime has gotten way better as one of the people behind (https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com). Compared to 10 years ago things are so much more redundant and harder to take down.

View on HN

Thanks for the data-based comment!

Have you noticed any change in that trend in the past year or two, or is it continuing to get better?

Np, 2 years is harder for me to tell. We need to get more of that data public and organized, and are looking at how we can do that...

We are working on some big improvements to the backend and should have some cool stuff to share later this year :)

Thank you finally.

Tired of all the people online with anxiety who project their own personal issues by spamming this kind of doomer posts.

So then why does no one offer 99.999% uptime guarantees in writing?

It should be low risk to offer such guarantees then.

Well, (a) why would they? (b) "uptime" has shifted from a binary "site up/down" to "degraded performance", which itself indicates improvements to uptime since we're both pickier and more precise.

Are we really questioning why cloud providers would offer better uptime guarantees?

Yes, I'm asking why they'd lock themselves into a contract around 5 9s of uptime since the parent poster mentioned that they won't do so. Of course, AWS actually does do this in some cases and they guarantee 99.99% for most things, so it feels a bit arbitrary - 5 minutes vs an hour, roughly.

So then its clearly not as trivial to achieve as you made it sound.

Are you replying to the right person?

You can certainly sign a contract for five nines SLA with cloud providers.

You just won't like the price.

Then it’s clearly higher risk?

If you are asking this question you don't understand what it takes to hit 5 nines in a real life measured system.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com