Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tubaguy50035's commentslogin

You're mistaking Kansas City, MO with Kansas City, KS. Kansas (the state) was running on fumes for a long time. Kansas (the state) also has nothing to do with this.

These are literally the first three words of the article: "Kansas City, Missouri"


Kansas the state was named after Missouri's second city. I guess they were just clever enough not to name it "Joplin"...


Close enough


Slightly off topic rant follows: I don't see a lot of tech sites talk about the fact that Azure and GCP have multi-region outages. Everybody sees this kind of thing and goes "shrug, an outage". No, this is not okay. We have multiple regions for a reason. Making an application support multi-region is HARD and COSTLY. If I invest that into my app, I never want it go down due to a configuration push. There has never been an AWS incident across multiple regions (us-east-1, us-west-2, etc). That is a pretty big deal to me.

Whenever I post this somebody comes along and says "well that one time us-east-1 went down and everybody was using the generic S3 endpoints so it took everything down". This is true, and the ASG and EBS services in other regions apparently were. BUT, if you invested the time to ensure your application could be multi-region and you hosted on AWS, you would not have seen an outage. Scaling and snapshots might not have worked, but it would not have been the 96.2% packet drop that GCP is showing here and your end users likely would not have noticed.

The articles that track outages at the different cloud vendors really should be pushing this.


Obviously we don't know what the extent of the issue is yet, but afaik there has never been an AWS incident that has affected multiple regions where an application had been designed to use them (like using region specific S3 endpoints). GCP and Azure have had issues in multiple regions that would have affected applications designed for multi-region.


> like using region specific S3 endpoints

AWS had the S3 incident affecting all of us-east-1: “Other AWS services in the US-EAST-1 Region that rely on S3 for storage, including the S3 console, Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2) new instance launches, Amazon Elastic Block Store (EBS) volumes (when data was needed from a S3 snapshot), and AWS Lambda were also impacted while the S3 APIs were unavailable.”

https://aws.amazon.com/message/41926/


That's one region, not the multiple region that OP mentioned


Services in other regions depended transitively on us-east-1, so it was a multiple region outage.


Which services in other regions? I remember that day well, but I had my eyes on us-east-1 so I don't remember what else (other than status reporting) was affected elsewhere.


There was a massive push after that to have everything regionalized. It's not 100% but it's super close at this point.


S3 buckets are a global namespace, so control plane operations have to be single-homed. As an example, global consensus has to be reached before returning a success response for bucket creation to ensure that two buckets can't be created with the same name.


The availability of CreateBucket shouldnt effect the availability of customers apps. This tends to be true anyway because of the low default limit of buckets per account (if your service creates buckets as part of normal operation it will run out pretty quickly).

The difference with Google Cloud is a lot of the core functionality (networking, storage) is multi region and consistent. The only thing thats a bit like that in AWS is IAM, however IAM is eventually consistent.


But isn't CreateBucket the single s3 operation where you need global consistency?


As far as I know bucket policy operations also require global consistency.


If my credit card is paying for an account, why wouldn't I get access to it?

There's lots to wish about Linode, but them allowing the person paying the bills to manage the account isn't one of them.


I laid ot the legal situation above.


Turn your phone off and send a message to someone from your computer. Oh wait...


Huh, I’ve done this before. Don’t know why you’re acting like it’s not a thing.


You can send messages using whatsapp desktop when your phone is off?


Oh shi- Dude! You're totally right. I thought you meant figuratively like "turn your computer off and go out". No, yeah. I get it. iMessage definitely does have that edge.


Hangouts + Google Voice integration works just fine as well. Which is why I think most of us in this thread are/were pissed off. It's the only solution for us right now, with no clear way forward.


I can't deal with how signal desktop works. I DO NOT want messaging tied to my phone. I want it tied to an account that works wherever I sign in. I'd love to use Signal, but can't deal with that.


You want XMPP or Matrix.


Or, realistically, Discord. I love open protocols but I do want a certain level of polish in the products I use.


Sounds like what you are looking for is Wire (wire.com).

Desktop/mobile clients. No need for phone to login.

Oh, and server code written in Haskell :)


Kinda neat how careful they were to not say Azure performance was terrible.


Was it? Are there any numbers?


Did they learn nothing from the Azure of yore? You don't roll out a change globally, ever.

While the postmortem is appreciated, I'd rather they just didn't roll out changes globally.


What does this do better/differently than an ADFS set up?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: