4 ms·
This is correct; probability works against you if you spread your instances over multiple zones without also compensating with some very solid failover. If you
by rbranson 14y ago
This is correct; probability works against you if you spread your instances over multiple zones without also compensating with some very solid failover. If you are not willing to put the effort into truly going fully active/active/active across THREE availability zones, you might as well just stick with one and weather the outages.
- mechanical_fish 14y agoI think that's a bit of an exaggeration. My old company (Acquia) kept a lot of customers up through the various outages with mere two-zone redundancy. You do need to actually engineer for failover and recovery, though. That point is correct: It doesn't necessarily help you to have half of your servers survive an outage if that still kills your service or requires painful amounts of manual intervention. And it really is a lot easier to just shrug, keep your backups up to date, and pray for your zone to come back ASAP. Do your cost-benefit analysis.