[tgtweak]

You can't really have 30+ fully independent regions running their own stack with different versions of apps and separate secrets, IP/routing and certificates in each. At some point you have to unify or it becomes either unmanageable or inconsistent.

[markstos]

Right. You want regions to be fully independent, yet the software stacks they are running to be fully synchronized and consistent. So there’s a tension. If there’s a sleeper bug that wakes only after it has been rolled out to every region, you’ve got a global outage. Given the increasing complexity of these systems, it will always be possible to find all those.

[skywhopper]

Most of GCP’s customers can’t, but independent regions are one of the benefits that a well architected cloud provider can give you to build on.

[dastbe]

do you mean the cloud provider can't, or the customer can't?

[xwolfi]

But you can have 3. Why did you choose 30?

In my company we are split in 3, US, EU, APAC, and we have the same issue with global outage for stuff we could have just managed regionally. For all the savings of the global architecture, they disappear each minute a client is down on a global outage because a guy thousands of kms away messed up.

You dont have to unify, at all. You dont unify with your competitors, and the world has not exploded: compete internally between regions ?

[shepherdjerred]

GCP needs to support 30 regions because... they're a cloud provider.

[xwolfi]

Then they can do a glocal model with 10 regions grouped into 3 semi global groups, so when there s a global outage, it can only be on one of these ?

[esperent]

How does this fit in with upcoming EU data sovereignty laws?