3 ms·
You know that if US East suffers a FULL data loss that the recovery would take weeks with the question if it would even be possible. That's what happened to ovh
by BoredPositron 2y ago
You know that if US East suffers a FULL data loss that the recovery would take weeks with the question if it would even be possible. That's what happened to ovh... it wasn't just one building.
- clarkdave 2y ago> It's not like there is a mirror datacenter just two blocks away Isn't that exactly what Availability Zones are for? They're physically separate[0] datacenters and each one contains a copy of each S3 object (unless using the explicit single-zone options) It's also straightforward (although not necessarily that cheap) to replicate S3 objects to another region [0] https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/faqs/?nc1=h_ls#Platform https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/faqs/?nc1=h_ls#Platform
- ahofmann 2y agoIt literally was one building in france, that burned to the ground: https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/analysis/ovhcloud-fire-france-data-center/ https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/analysis/ovhcloud-fire...
- abadpoli 2y agoIf us-east-1 ever suffered a “FULL” data loss, it would be a company-ending event for so many companies that it would practically end society as we know it. OVH’s failure was a single building. That’s the problem with a lot of server hosters - even Google has their availability zones all co-located in the same building, so a physical event like a fire could take down an entire region. AWS has AZs in physically separate locations, each with 1+ separate DCs.
- t0mas88 2y agoIs the any GCP documentation on that? Sounds like a far bigger risk going with GCP than AWS if all zones in a region are in the same building.