Re:Has Amazon EC2 become over subscribed? (2010)
by ultimoo on Sunday April 21, 2013 @11:16PM
(#5587564)
Yes, the year of the blog should definitely be present in the HN title.
That said, what is the deal with the internal network latency and the other points the OP touched upon today? Did Amazon get around to resolving things, or have things worsened?
Re:Has Amazon EC2 become over subscribed? (2010)
by seldo on Monday April 22, 2013 @01:09AM
(#5587870)
My non-rigorous impression is that latency is roughly the same now as it was in 2010, i.e. not great, but at least it hasn't been getting worse.
Re:Has Amazon EC2 become over subscribed? (2010)
by redact207 on Sunday April 21, 2013 @11:49PM
(#5587675)
Have there been any improvements since then?
Re:Has Amazon EC2 become over subscribed? (2010)
by codewright on Monday April 22, 2013 @01:06AM
(#5587865)
No, it's still common to have in-house "find a good node" code that fires up and takes down machines until one that will be reliable is found.
Re:Has Amazon EC2 become over subscribed? (2010)
by wmf on Sunday April 21, 2013 @11:57PM
(#5587705)
Previous HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1048694
Can you enlighten us? Why is it so slow? Are some people abusing all of that free bandwidth? Is their LAN simply not built to handle much traffic?
Re:Has Amazon EC2 become over subscribed? (2010)
by trotsky on Sunday April 21, 2013 @11:51PM
(#5587685)
I don't have any inside information, but I would guess it's because their san is so sketchy everyone rolls their own DFS and uses other chatty replication strategies, leaving the network running data and disk on the same topology. These days a lot of that traffic will take 4 hops within an AZ.
Then I saw:
Published: 9:01 AM GMT, Tuesday, 12 January 2010