Ma Bell spoiled us. AT&T's dial tone set the all-time standard for reliability. It was engineered so that 99.999 per cent of the time, you could successfully make a phone call. Five 9s. That works out to being available all but 5.26 minutes a year. Can we realistically expect that such availability will ever come to internet services? Any given week, it seems, some well-known service suffers a shutdown. Last week, it was Hotmail; the week before, Skype was out for more than a day. And Wikipedia, Facebook, Twitter, Four-square and PayPal, among others, made the 2010 list of service interruptions compiled by Royal Pingdom, a company in Sweden that monitors the up time of web services worldwide.
Internet computing , however, isn't as unreliable as it may seem. After all, when was the last time you got to Google's home page but couldn't complete your search?
As more and more web services companies acquire years of experience, we'll see more consistent reliability - it's just a matter of time and learning.
Attaining Four-9s availability will become routine. That means available all but 52.56 minutes a year.
As for moving to 99.999, well, that may never come. "We don't believe Five 9s is attainable in a commercial service, if measured correctly," says Urs Hoelzle, senior vice-president for operations at Google. The company's goal for its major services is Four 9s.
Google's search service almost reaches Five 9s every year, Hoelzle says. By its very nature, it is relatively easy to provide uninterrupted avail-ability for search. There are many redundant copies of Google's indexes of the web, and they are spread across many data centres. A web search does not require constant updating of a user's personal information in one place and then instantly creating identical copies at other data centres. Gmail has backup copies offline, but it normally uses two perfectly mir-rored live copies - and that introduces the potential for trouble. Last year, Gmail's availability was 99.984%.
" Google doesn't have the luxury of scheduled downtime for mainte-nance," says Armando Fox, an adjunct associate professor in the College of Engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. Nor can it take down the service, he says, to install upgrades. "It is not uncommon for a place like Google to push out a major release every week," he said, adding that such frequency is 'unprecedented' for the software industry.
Computing services built for Internet scale have been pioneered by Amazon, too. It offers to other businesses Amazon web services, almost two dozen discrete categories of services, such as computing cycles or database software running on Amazon's machines. These are the same behind-the-scenes computing services that the company uses to run Amazon.com.
One of those services, the Simple Storage Service, or S3, allows compa-nies to store data on Amazon's servers. "We talk of 'durability' of data - it's designed for Eleven-9s durability," says James Hamilton, a vice-president for Amazon web services. That works out to a 0.000000001% chance of data being lost, at least theoretically.
As soon as a problem surfaces with an internet service - anywhere - it will receive wide coverage in the technology media. But when a branch office of a nontech company has problems with its own e-mail server used for Microsoft Outlook, no one outside of that office is the wiser.
One thing that Google and other companies offering web services have learned to do is to keep software problems at their end out of the user's view. John Ciancutti, vice president for personalisation technology at Netflix, wrote on the company's blog in December about lessons learned in moving its systems from its own infrastructure to that of Amazon web services. He said Netflix had adopted a "Rambo architec-ture": each part of its system is designed to fight its way through on its own, tolerating failure from other systems upon which it normally de-pends.
"If our recommendations system is down, we degrade the quality of our responses to our customers, but we still respond," Ciancutti said. "We'll show popular titles instead of personalised picks. If our search system is intolerably slow, streaming should still work perfectly fine."
Netflix intentionally stresses its systems with software it calls its "Chaos Monkey." It creates mischief like shutting down Netflix's own subsys-tems randomly and challenging the other subsystems to adapt on the fly. Ciancutti writes, "If we weren't constantly testing our ability to suc-ceed" when experiencing subsystems' failures, "then it isn't likely to work when it matters most - in the event of an unexpected outage.
Disclaimer: All information on this news has been compiled from their respective official websites or through public domain sites and leading newspapers. Although, we have taken reasonable efforts to provide you with accurate information, but we assumes no responsibility for the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of the Information and would advise you to verify it from the official product provider. We cannot guarantee that the information on this page is 100% correct. If you would like to advertise on our site please contact us
