3 ms·
Do you consider a 45-minute outage once a month to be acceptable? Maybe for the price, it is.
by packetslave 14y ago
Do you consider a 45-minute outage once a month to be acceptable? Maybe for the price, it is.
- dean 14y agoDepends how you look at it. A minute and a half a day? Doesn't sound too bad when you say it that way. A 3-hour outage every 4 months? My cable company can barely do that.
- jqueryin 14y agoThe problem is outages tend to be for prolonged periods and not spread evenly across the month. A minute may not seem like a huge deal, but 3 consecutive hours is really going to piss some people off. If you run a business, it's completely irresponsible to provide such a low level of service to your customers.
- coldtea 14y agoWell, if we are being pragmatic it sounds totally acceptable for any kind of business. Except maybe if those outages hit them at the worst possible moments of the month (just before a major announcement or something). Now, managers would froth at the mouth hearing 45 mins/month is acceptable. But those managers are idiots. I haven't seen any major site that didn't have those (and worse) outages. 5-6 hours a year? Heck tons of sites had those. AWS had them (and thus Heroku had them), GAE had them, Twitter had them, Tumblr (well they had one-two orders of magnitude more), etc. 45 mins a month represent lots of lost revenue to you? Really? If you're not Google or something, then what exactly do you do? Shouldn't that be like 0.1% of your revenue? And that IF you sell online and IF we assume customers aren't gonna come back. Heck, you lose more because of random fluctuations in buyer preferences than that.