Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dilyevsky 1919 days ago
I’m sure google can afford some colo space (probably would be cheaper too)
2 comments

Makes me think of a calculus word problem: As the things Google cannot afford approaches 0...
Sure, but what’s more likely to be reliable: GCP/AWS or a colo?

It’s also embarrassing (and can cause stress for your customers) when your status page is down.

Imo for simple deployment colo with a major provider (equinix, coresite, etc) and redundant transit beats any cloud on reliability hands down
How do you know that there isn't a disaster plan under which Google routes requests for status.cloud.google.com to some other, non-Google host?
I honestly have no idea, hope they do. My point is aws is not the only alternative (and not even the best one) for setting this up.
A separate failure domain / uncorrelated failure can be more important than the absolute rate of failure.