It's a bit odd that they don't stop launching new VMs on the old hardware. That would allow people who wanted to control the transition to just stop and start their VMs.
And of course, Amazon has an interest in encouraging its users to build their systems in a cloud-friendly way. ie, properly designed services on AWS should not suffer from having a handful of VMs get rebooted at any time. So, from that POV, it's just good medicine to encourage the culture they built their service to accommodate.
they probably are operating at a pretty
high percentage, so gradually idling 10%
of their host hardware would probably
put a pinch on availability
If they can withstand the loss of one of out of three availability zones, they must have at least 33% spare capacity in each AZ, ready for new instances to start to take up the slack from the lost AZ.Even if they have more availability zones than the three they show to users, I would hope they would have more than 10% spare capacity!
It sounds like you could spin up new instances until you get one that doesn't require the update.