ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Why the Public Cloud Rebooted

    IT Discussion
    xen rackspace softlayer ibm public cloud cloud computing amazon
    3
    5
    2.1k
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • scottalanmillerS
      scottalanmiller
      last edited by

      Over the weekend the majority of the world's public clouds rebooted. Most notably were Rackspace, Amazon and IBM Softlayer. Why? Because of a patch that needed to be applies to Xen, the hypervisor that powers effectively the entire global cloud provisioning space except for the obvious exception of Azure.

      At MangoLassi we were impacted by this too, as we run on Rackspace. That was the cause of our weekend blip. But an important security update that needed to be applied very quickly. And the downtime was minimal.

      ? 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
      • ?
        A Former User @scottalanmiller
        last edited by

        How come they don't fail over the VMs to another server, then update the original server move them back and so on as to make it an update with no down time?

        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • scottalanmillerS
          scottalanmiller @A Former User
          last edited by

          @thecreativeone91 said:

          How come they don't fail over the VMs to another server, then update the original server move them back and so on as to make it an update with no down time?

          Cloud is not high availability. That's a very common misconception. Cloud is beneath the HA layer. Anyone who had HA stayed up and running, of course, but cloud itself is not HA.

          JaredBuschJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • JaredBuschJ
            JaredBusch @scottalanmiller
            last edited by

            @scottalanmiller said:

            @thecreativeone91 said:

            How come they don't fail over the VMs to another server, then update the original server move them back and so on as to make it an update with no down time?

            Cloud is not high availability. That's a very common misconception. Cloud is beneath the HA layer. Anyone who had HA stayed up and running, of course, but cloud itself is not HA.

            They easily could have chosen to do so, but the workload would not offset the cost I am sure.

            scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • scottalanmillerS
              scottalanmiller @JaredBusch
              last edited by

              @JaredBusch said:

              @scottalanmiller said:

              @thecreativeone91 said:

              How come they don't fail over the VMs to another server, then update the original server move them back and so on as to make it an update with no down time?

              Cloud is not high availability. That's a very common misconception. Cloud is beneath the HA layer. Anyone who had HA stayed up and running, of course, but cloud itself is not HA.

              They easily could have chosen to do so, but the workload would not offset the cost I am sure.

              Not really, because you can only do so much HA at that layer. Not every workload can be made HA in that way. But more importantly, HA is always an option and most importantly, HA is something you do, not something that you buy. But anyone who had an outage, like us, chose to not pay for HA because it is cheaper to have blips than to have the cost of HA.

              It's really the end users who opted out of HA.

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • 1 / 1
              • First post
                Last post