Google App Engine Broken For 4 Hours And Counting
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
When the 'cloud' goes down (or at least some part of it) then you'll notice this immediately because of the large number of sites going down all at once. But when you compare it with the accumulated downtime of all those users had they not been 'cloud users' but hosted on their own kit then it is very well possible that the balance is still in favour of hosting in the cloud.
We have no real network administrators. Within our engineering team we collectively have the skill to be an effective at systems administration, but the hardware side is really a complete mystery.
Co-location mostly solves that, but the cloud takes it a step further. By running in a virtualized environment we can handle what we're good at it and let others build complex data centers to scale our traffic.
When your bootstrapping a start-up, that's just huge.
Considering how cheap dedicated servers are moving a service to the cloud makes little sense (exceptions notwithstanding).
I'm talking about real SLAs with compensation here, mind you, not the toilet paper you get from every cheapo ISP.
Getting that kind of uptime is much harder than it sounds and for a lot of websites not worth the extra cost. How much money would pay to go from 99.9% uptime (~9 hours /year) to 99.99% (52 minutes)?
Obviously it's more complex for a large site but for the vast majority I would say that level of uptime is the rule rather than the exception.
Three nines is pretty unacceptable in this day and age. Providers might only guarantee that level of uptime but if they really were down that much I'd run a mile. Netcraft is your friend!
update: edited post to better reflect reality
I'm mostly wondering how it compares with the setup at my current location.
I have worked on systems that were designed for this, but I'm not sure if it's cost effective for most web applications. Most things can wait on occasion.
Thank you.
You see your not actually paying for the 3 9's or the 5 9's. That is just corporate bullshit. Your paying for the promise that whatever the problem someone will be able to fix it in a few hours at most.
Due to Google App Engine's API lock-in, you're stuck with them as a provider... quite possibly forever due to heavy BigTable dependency.
Even though I'm a huge fan of cloud computing, I'd rather use a strategy that uses platforms/planes that are built from reusable parts and allow you to switch your plane/airline provider as you please. Don't like Delta? Just go to AA counter and you don't have to change your luggage, clothing etc.
Until there's a second, GAE-compatible, ISV provider that offers full compatibility with GAE, I'd avoid GAE like a plague.
If GAE fails to live up to the better-then-DIY-on-average promise, you can't leave.
Assuming you can still dump your data out of Googlage?
What's the point of having a status page it's only up as long as your service? We shouldn't have to hunt around a Google Group for information about what's going on.
I don't think so. Javascript files hosted os s3 would hang the page loading and without css/images the app would be useless too.
[Edit: And keeping a hot copy of that data is a lot harder than it sounds]
Update: Actually, my app is in the "read only mode" they described... the moment I tried to update anything it went to hell :)