NINETY DAYS
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea oh, no! Just a few more days, and it would also have been the 90th day of the year (the 31st, if I counted correctly)
-
@0xabad1dea There are five nines on the screenshot, I don't see any problem.
@dos @0xabad1dea 9.9999 eh?
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
Somebody just has to type "continue" into the right co-pilot chat at Github.
-
@0xabad1dea is that a sequel to "Nine Hours, Nine Persons, Nine Doors"?
@ratsnakegames @0xabad1dea nine hundred ninety nine thousand, nine hundred seconds. how do you measure... yearly uptime?
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange
We see GitHub is still working on that second nine of uptime: https://transfem.social/notes/ak8mfds9u2eg00ac -
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea We're just sloply moving to a new industry standard of nine fives.
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange I don't know, but hot take... 1 is not 5... Though what would I know... I'm not good at math. Apparently. In other news... 3 is not 4... These are interesting things that seem to be hard for others to know, or maybe I'm just the stupid person who doesn't understand math.
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea That's worse uptime than most of the services I run for myself.
-
@0xabad1dea Where did this come from? status.github.com paints a very different picture, though also not particularly great honestly…
@slembcke to confirm what someone else said while I was asleep, it’s an independent third party tracker called the “missing” github status page. https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/
they track ten subsystems separately, which are each in the 96% to 99.9% range, then overlay all those incidents on the same timeline to arrive at 90% overall.
I do not have any particular stance on whether github’s own tracker or this third party one is more fair and accurate, beyond “90-90-90 is hilarious” and observing only one of them has a contractual stake in possibly sometimes downplaying issues a little bit.
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea It's my perpetual joke about Monkeybrains and their eight eights of uptime but the load-bearing structure of the interweb.
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea the green bits are 100%
It’s 99.999% but we’re not telling you the timeframe.
-
@0xabad1dea the green bits are 100%
It’s 99.999% but we’re not telling you the timeframe.
@SecurityWriter @0xabad1dea 90% of the time it works 100% of the time
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea the yolocolo at european chaos/hacker events has used "9.9999% is also five nines" in some posters...
maybe that's the logic Github's operating by too
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea somebody should organize a class action
-
@0xabad1dea the green bits are 100%
It’s 99.999% but we’re not telling you the timeframe.
Or they select very carefully upon the calculation:
it's a difference if you count ALL services working and ANY disruption, even that of a single service/server as fail, or whether you count a single server failure against the total number.If you have 100 (virtual) servers you can keep one server swicthed off ALL THE TIME (0% individual availability) and still have 99% availability overall.
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea you can get more 9s of uptime is the first number is an 8
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange mfw the server that lives in my basement has better uptime than a trillion dollar company
-
NINETY DAYS
NINETY INCIDENTS
NINETY PERCENT
YOU PAID FOR ALL FIVE NINES BUT YOU’LL ONLY NEED THE EDGE
@0xabad1dea ah, found the source of this image:
https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/ -
Or they select very carefully upon the calculation:
it's a difference if you count ALL services working and ANY disruption, even that of a single service/server as fail, or whether you count a single server failure against the total number.If you have 100 (virtual) servers you can keep one server swicthed off ALL THE TIME (0% individual availability) and still have 99% availability overall.
@vampirdaddy @SecurityWriter @0xabad1dea I once worked at a company I liked that said "anyone promising 100% uptime is lying"
They got bought out and ruined by a company that said "100% UPTIME*" on the wall
and in tiny tiny writing "*core network uptime" way down in small print in the basement
-
@vampirdaddy @SecurityWriter @0xabad1dea I once worked at a company I liked that said "anyone promising 100% uptime is lying"
They got bought out and ruined by a company that said "100% UPTIME*" on the wall
and in tiny tiny writing "*core network uptime" way down in small print in the basement
@vampirdaddy @SecurityWriter @0xabad1dea Because, technically, they had a very large core network and they'd had a COMPLETE nationwide network outage.
Of course this bullshit did not fly anytime they had a LOCAL outage.
