January 28th Incident Report

Re:January 28th Incident Report by theptip on Wednesday February 03, 2016 @06:32PM (#11030806)

It's shocking that they don't at least have a read replica of their system in another 'AZ'. That's cloud hosting 101, and being self-hosted isn't an excuse to skimp on this.

If an outage caused 2 hours of read-only access to repos it would still be moderately impactful, but at least we could still build our Go code.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:January 28th Incident Report by drdrey on Wednesday February 03, 2016 @07:58PM (#11031208)

For people reading this, AZ in this context would be Availability Zone

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:January 28th Incident Report by vacri on Thursday February 04, 2016 @04:32AM (#11032862)

For people reading this, 'Availability Zone' in this context would be (AWS speak for) 'datacentre'. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:January 28th Incident Report by paulddraper on Wednesday February 03, 2016 @11:28PM (#11031981)

Right, and not the Grand Canyon State.

The space of acronyms/abbreviations is quite cluttered.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:January 28th Incident Report by theptip on Thursday February 04, 2016 @12:32PM (#11035556)

Heh, not from the US initially so that overloading did not occur to me :)

That's an interesting alternate reading though...

"To ensure the integrity of our data, we need to locate another Arizona, since this one is serving us so well."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:January 28th Incident Report by paulddraper on Wednesday February 03, 2016 @11:31PM (#11031994)

Right, and not the Grand Canyon State.

The space of acronyms/abbreviations is quite cluttered.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:January 28th Incident Report by NetStrikeForce on Thursday February 04, 2016 @02:37PM (#11036550)

So your building process depends on the availability of an external company?

[ Parent | on HN ]