4 ms·
I think so. I'm a GCP user and I'm afraid of hosting workloads there now. I've heard too many nightmare stories, and I thought Google would be proper and thus n
by r_lee 5mo ago
I think so. I'm a GCP user and I'm afraid of hosting workloads there now. I've heard too many nightmare stories, and I thought Google would be proper and thus not be infested with these kind of problems that cheaper providers are known for.
Maybe AWS is the only player in town now? I don't know. Google doesn't instill confidence with these incidents, same with those cases of insurmountable bills caused by simple mistakes where there should be a way for smaller customers to cap usage.
- dogscatstrees 5mo agoWhat about Azure?
- skinner927 5mo agoDo you care about uptime and security?
- joezydeco 5mo agohttps://isolveproblems.substack.com/p/how-microsoft-vaporized-a-trillion https://isolveproblems.substack.com/p/how-microsoft-vaporize... HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47616242
- 1attice 5mo agoHonestly the best counterattack Iran could make rn would be somehow convincing the Pentagon to move everything to Azure
- mxuribe 5mo agoYour statement was one of those that made me chuckle because it started as a joke...and then reality set in the more i thought about it, and then it made me feel sad, nervous, etc.
- oneplane 5mo agoI'd rather go back to bare metal than use Azure.
- sergiotapia 5mo agoI would rather raise goats, than use Azure.
- Oras 5mo agoAzure is a toy platform, not a real cloud. Too many changes, far from being reliable. Unless imposed by employer to use, run a mile.
- graemep 5mo ago> I thought Google would be proper and thus not be infested with these kind of problems that cheaper providers are known for. These sorts of things have happened before with Google and the other expensive providers. Are cheaper providers known for doing this? I would have thought they would be less lively to, as they are smaller and therefore every customer is relatively more important to them, and they are therefore more likely to check before turning services off.
- antasvara 5mo ago> Are cheaper providers known for doing this? I would have thought they would be less lively to, as they are smaller and therefore every customer is relatively more important to them, and they are therefore more likely to check before turning services off. In my experience, the reason they're cheaper is because they offer fewer features (cut down on ongoing expenses) and because they aggressively enforce TOS (the margins are thinner, so you're less able to afford people using more resources than allocated).
- graemep 5mo agoThe very cheapest are on thin margins, so that seems to be as expected, but there are a lot of providers between the very cheapest and the high prices charged by the hyperscalers. Pricing somewhere in between and offering some actual customer service?
- trollbridge 5mo agoWell, I would host workloads on GCP... provided I could easily move them elsewhere and I just treat them as disposable.
- okdood64 5mo agoWould you be okay with GCP making public issues you encounter with your account?
- r_lee 5mo agoif it's some automated behavior, yes. I'd like to know what it is, why it exists, how it works (how to avoid triggering it) and what they're doing to make sure it never happens again
- okdood64 5mo agoYou're assuming GCP was in the wrong. What if it turns out someone's actions within your company resulted in this? And you woke up to see some TechCrunch article about how one of your engineers took down your site in all it's glory details?