Matt The Horwood@lemmy.horwood.cloud to Selfhosted@lemmy.worldEnglish · 16 hours agoAWS is having a bad dayhealth.aws.amazon.comexternal-linkmessage-square114linkfedilinkarrow-up1412arrow-down15
arrow-up1407arrow-down1external-linkAWS is having a bad dayhealth.aws.amazon.comMatt The Horwood@lemmy.horwood.cloud to Selfhosted@lemmy.worldEnglish · 16 hours agomessage-square114linkfedilink
minus-squarevillage604linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·12 hours agoIt’s also silly for the orgs to not have geographic redundancy.
minus-squarekillabeezio@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·7 hours agoNo it’s not. It’s very expensive to run and there are a lot of edge cases. It’s much easier to have regional redundancy for a fraction of the cost.
minus-squarevillage604linkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·edit-24 hours agoThe organizations they were talking about and I was referring to have a global presence Plus, it’s not significantly more expensive to have a cold standby in a different geographic location in AWS.
It’s also silly for the orgs to not have geographic redundancy.
No it’s not. It’s very expensive to run and there are a lot of edge cases. It’s much easier to have regional redundancy for a fraction of the cost.
The organizations they were talking about and I was referring to have a global presence
Plus, it’s not significantly more expensive to have a cold standby in a different geographic location in AWS.