4 ms·

At some point people realized servers are prone to failure. They then started deploying their system redundantly to multiple servers in the data center (AZ) to

by mslot 7y ago

At some point people realized servers are prone to failure. They then started deploying their system redundantly to multiple servers in the data center (AZ) to increase availability. This helped, but created consistency issues. To fix this people started building multi-server software systems, creating dependencies across servers that weakened overall availability. At some point people realized multi-server systems within one AZ are prone to failure. They then started deploying their system redundantly to multiple AZs within the same region to increase availability. This helped, but created consistency issues. To fix this people started building multi-AZ software systems, creating dependencies across AZs that weakened overall availability. At some point people realized multi-AZ systems within one region are prone to failure. They then started deploying their system redundantly to multiple regions of the same cloud platform to increase availability. This helped, but created consistency issues. To fix this people started building multi-region software systems, creating dependencies across regions that weakened overall availability. At some point people realized multi-region systems within one cloud platform are prone to failure. They then started deploying their system redundantly to multiple cloud platforms to increase availability. This helped, but created consistency issues. To fix this people started building multi-cloud software systems, creating dependencies across cloud platforms that weakened overall availability.

log_n 7y ago
Humanity's colonization of the stars will eventually be spurred on by the desire improve the resiliency of SaaS.
asark 7y ago
I honestly think a one- or two-server setup with scripted server re-creation, proven in Vagrant or whatever, and maybe using Docker but only to isolate services on those one or two servers and make it easier to re-create, tested frequently by spinning up local dev copies, and (obviously) with backups, is probably a stabler, cheaper, and higher-availability set-up for the vast majority of use cases. Even if predicted, scheduled downtime is somewhat higher, it's probably worth it for the many benefits. But no, cloud everything.
ohum 7y ago
At some point the system realized people are prone to failure. It then started deploying itself redundantly without dependence on people. This helped, but the people interfered. To fix this the system started building self replicating physical instances, creating new dependencies on material that resulted in grey goo (or paper clips).

by mslot 7y ago

log_n 7y ago

Humanity's colonization of the stars will eventually be spurred on by the desire improve the resiliency of SaaS.

asark 7y ago

I honestly think a one- or two-server setup with scripted server re-creation, proven in Vagrant or whatever, and maybe using Docker but only to isolate services on those one or two servers and make it easier to re-create, tested frequently by spinning up local dev copies, and (obviously) with backups, is probably a stabler, cheaper, and higher-availability set-up for the vast majority of use cases. Even if predicted, scheduled downtime is somewhat higher, it's probably worth it for the many benefits. But no, cloud everything.

ohum 7y ago

At some point the system realized people are prone to failure. It then started deploying itself redundantly without dependence on people. This helped, but the people interfered. To fix this the system started building self replicating physical instances, creating new dependencies on material that resulted in grey goo (or paper clips).