News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage. Parent comment

Re:Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage by DinkyG on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @01:45PM (#10260261)
Multiple facilities != "one datacenter"
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage by toomuchtodo on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @01:45PM (#10260266)
Like I asked below, do you have a citation?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage by DinkyG on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @01:55PM (#10260326)
"No one data center serves two availability zones" :

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/04/16/aws_data_centre_arch...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage by toomuchtodo on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @02:31PM (#10260593)
From your link:

"To solve latency, Amazon built Availability Zones on groups of tightly coupled data centres. Each data centre in a Zone is less than 25 microseconds away from its sibling and packs 102Tbps of networking."

25 microseconds at the speed of light (best case, through a vacuum; through fiber is significantly slower) is ~4.7 miles, and based on the quote, that is the furthest they are apart. If your buildings are within 1-2 miles of each other, they're essentially the same facility.

That is not geographically redundant.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage by gamegoblin on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @02:37PM (#10260645)
Sure, it's not geographically redundant, but nobody in this thread claimed it was. DinkyG disputed that your "one datacenter" claim was false, which it appears to be.
[ Parent | on HN ]
[dead]
Re:Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage by gamegoblin on Tuesday September 22, 2015 @02:12PM (#10260445)
Given that they created the account to comment in the DynamoDB thread, I'd guess they're a DynamoDB developer, but that doesn't invalidate anything they've said in this thread -- they even provided a 3rd party source.
[ Parent | on HN ]