News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Summary of the AWS Service Event in the Northern Virginia (US-East-1) Region. Parent comment

Re:Summary of the AWS Service Event in the Northern Virginia... by bombcar on Saturday December 11, 2021 @12:42AM (#29518766)
True multi-cloud redundancy is hard to test - because it’s everything from DNS on up and it’s hard to ask AWS to go offline so you can verify Azure picks up the slack.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Summary of the AWS Service Event in the Northern Virginia... by wjossey on Saturday December 11, 2021 @08:57PM (#29526355)
I deeply concur with this statement. I think folks here are conflating a one off test versus keeping your redundancy up to date as apps evolve.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Summary of the AWS Service Event in the Northern Virginia... by kqr on Saturday December 11, 2021 @01:48AM (#29519033)
Sure you can. Firewall AWS off from whatever machine does the health checks in the redundancy implementation.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Summary of the AWS Service Event in the Northern Virginia... by pixl97 on Saturday December 11, 2021 @08:39AM (#29520751)
What happens when your health check system fails?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Summary of the AWS Service Event in the Northern Virginia... by speedgoose on Saturday December 11, 2021 @12:52AM (#29518815)
It's true, but you can do load balancing at the DNS level.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Summary of the AWS Service Event in the Northern Virginia... by darkwater on Saturday December 11, 2021 @04:36AM (#29519709)
And you will get 1/N of requests timing or erroring out, and in the meanwhile paying 2x or 3x the costs. So, it might be worth in some cases but you need to evaluate it very, very well.
[ Parent | on HN ]