4 ms·
The solution is either to have a PaaS provider who ruthlessly eliminates single points of failure (there isn't one, currently) This isn't possible by definitio
by T-hawk 14y ago
The solution is either to have a PaaS provider who ruthlessly eliminates single points of failure (there isn't one, currently)
This isn't possible by definition, right? The PaaS provider itself becomes the single point of failure.
Rings a bit like a "Who created God?" argument. "What single entity can I use to defend against failures by a single entity?"
- rdl 14y agoTheoretically, sure, but it's an engineering and economic thing. You can mitigate specific risks, and you try to prioritize those based on cost, frequency, and severity. If there were a great redundant provider with good authentication on accounts, a strong balance sheet and business, and sane policies on managing accounts, you would be fairly safe using just that provider. After all, you could always get a court order to cease providing services, yourselves, like if you do something some troll has patented. It kind of depends on your application, too -- if I were doing a wikileaks, a bitcoin exchange or torrent site or some other legally at risk business, I'd want country-level separation across multiple providers, at least as a cold backup. Casual game for facebook or mobile, not really much of a concern.