5 ms·
They really need to stop requiring SVPs or higher to show non-green status on the status page, as other HNers have revealed in last week's AWS post. It's effect
by sam0x17 5y ago
They really need to stop requiring SVPs or higher to show non-green status on the status page, as other HNers have revealed in last week's AWS post. It's effectively not a status page, and they could probably be sued if it can be demonstrated that X service was down but the status page showed green (since the SLA is based on status page). Should be automated and based on sample deployments running in every region and every service. And they should use non-AWS instances to do the sampling, so they can actually sample when, say, we experience the obligatory black friday us-east-1 outage every year.
- ceejayoz 5y agoThey were much faster than usual about updating the AWS Status page.
- JshWright 5y agoOur ~four person ops team shouldn't be able to have our status page updated 15 minutes before the upstream status page...
- Isthatablackgsd 5y agoI thought Status Pages or Health Pages is designed to automate the reporting and checking the status automatically. This was my impression when I came across those status pages. Apparently, it is not automated and only update it manually. What is the point of having a status pages if it cannot be automated? I'm sure FAANG and tech conglomerates don't want it to be automated because of SLA. I'm surprised with FAANG hosted their stuff in their competitors cloud services without providing a fallback cloud service if the primary service is down. Sure it cost money but it would be effective this way than putting all eggs in one basket.
- erhk 5y agoAny public communication is handled by people not machines. No one wants to make an automated status page because theres a shit ton of real noise that users dont need to hear about, nd theres a lot of outages that automation won't accurately catch
- hatware 5y agoAs stated earlier, AWS has financial incentive to not update the status page. Nobody is willing to call them on the conflict of interest in a meaningful, market-changing way.
- sam0x17 5y agoWould love to see them called out via new regulations or a lawsuit, however :)
- mwint 5y agoWhy is new regulation the answer here? Let everyone move to Azure, if they care that much about status pages and SLAs.
- wholinator2 5y agoWhat if everyone has a financial incentive to lie? (They do) Where do we go then? Also, saying "everyone just leave" is a lot easier than everyone "just leaving", but that's tired and repeated. There's a huge mess and tangle of incentives and drawbacks and I don't know if we'd ever get enough support to weed out a service that gets us above the n'th percentile of greatness. As one falls the other will begin to abuse its power, I dont trust any mega Corp to do otherwise. Do you?
- philistine 5y agoPerhaps someone could produce an alternate, Patreon-supported status page that accurately reports on the status of AWS services.
- stefan_ 5y agoWith some lame ass tiny blue "connectivity issues" informational text. Surely broken routing to two entire DCs is full red for all services available therein? Like what, the networking is broken but if you could send packets, the services would still work so they are green?
- Hamuko 5y agoI was still able to reach our service running in us-west-1 when the connectivity issue was still on-going, so I don't know if it was a full interruption.
- lljk_kennedy 5y agoI think SVP / GM approval is only needed for yellow / red status. From my time in AWS Support, the Support Oncall and Call Leader / GM delegate worked to approve green-i posts.
- sam0x17 5y agoIf my app won't run for reasons that are not my fault for longer than the SLA guarantees, the affected services should be at least yellow status and I should be accumulating free AWS credits.
- vineyardmike 5y ago> we experience the obligatory black friday us-east-1 outage every year. Is this a thing?