4 ms·

It's a myth that dedicated hosting in several geographically distant data centers really costs that much more than cloud computing. With a little bit of care, i

It's a myth that dedicated hosting in several geographically distant data centers really costs that much more than cloud computing. With a little bit of care, it's quite easy to get very good value from such hosting, with far more control over it. Outages like this could be easily avoided, or at the very least dealt with much quicker. It would not be the "end of a great many small to medium companies" were they to use dedicated hosting. Hell, this is how it was commonly done up until the past 2 to 3 years, and small and medium companies thrived quite well. In fact, after the cloud outages of the past week, and a few other recent outages, more traditional dedicated hosting keeps on looking better and better.

roee 14y ago
We actually pay for georeplication on Azure. Here's the official response from them: "Why didn’t we just fail over? We do have geo-replication for Windows Azure Blobs and Tables, where the data from US South is geo-replicated to keep another replica set of the data in US North. We have chosen at this time not to failover, since we believe we can bring back the primary storage stamp in US South in place. One of the advantages of recovering in place is it avoids losing the Windows Azure Queue data in that stamp, since Windows Azure Queues is not being geo-replicated at this time (we are working towards turning that on)."