Bill Woodger wrote: >>...giving a link to this [honest] post mortem by the AWS: >>https://aws.amazon.com/message/41926/
>I'm not sure "honest" is the exact word I'd use to describe what Amazon writes >:-). This is why I put that word in those brackets because I also barely read that airplane magazine junk you mentioned like this one: >"Finally, we want to apologize for the impact this event caused for our >customers. While we are proud of our long track record of availability with >Amazon S3, we know how critical this service is to our customers, their >applications and end users, and their businesses. We will do everything we can >to learn from this event and use it to improve our availability even further." I would also asked why 'finally'? >As has been said, don't you test it first? With something of >ever-increasing-scale you don't even rely on "well, it worked OK six months >ago". Do they have a sandbox to do their testing? Was that guy not supervised or peer reviewed at all? >They were "debugging". It was a "billing" problem. Something causing the >billing to "progress more slowly than expected" (does that really sound so >bad?). Debugging billing on a live system, and they loose vast numbers of >business-availability-hours across vast numbers of websites? Debugging? >Really? Seriously? And they can get away with that? I nearly spilled my coffee when I see that 'debugging' thing on a live system. Just like you, I also think it is just a standard PR thing. They're just pacifying journalists, shareholders, bosses and their users. >Move along, please, nothing to see here. Just a virtual police line. No rubberneckers here, move on! Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
