https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20977332 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20977332 > The last time he did shutdown the Mainframe was 15 years ago And

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20977332 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20977332 > The last time he did shutdown the Mainframe was 15 years ago And that was a controlled shutdown, not uncontrolled. If more than fifteen years is your time horizon to validate the zero downtime claim, that's cool. By that point, though, the system will have proven its worth. Right; unreliable supporting infrastructure is the inherent trickiness with saying the mainframe has zero downtime. The manufacturer isn't being deceptive, though, if, given reliable supporting infrastructure, the system will stay online for as long as is stated. It's just not their problem. Can't imagine a company would blame a manufacturer for downtime in the event of a flood/earthquake to protect the equipment. If a piece of equipment starts on fire, that's another story, but I suppose a zero-downtime system makes assumptions that it won't start on fire.