You are here

Home » Blogs » Konstantin Boyandin's blog

A challenge of uptime, or Who would stay longer than Amazon?

AWS logo

Uptime or no uptime, that is the question

Boasting of higher uptime is kind of, politely speaking, battle of egos. However, in this give case the uptime and ability to stay available (i.e., no connectivity interruption) is what I expect from hosting providers.

Personally, I continue moving my resources onto cloud servers/VPS or similar type of hosting wherever possible, and, wherever available, choose SSD-powered hosting.

For obvious reasons, I suppose.

My current VM at Blue Light Host, where this very blog is hosted, is up for 94 days, with no global connectivity interruptions within that interval.

My VM at AWS (Amazon Web Services), where I host my Subversion repositories, is up for 281 days — as well, no connectivity interruptions.

It grieves me to say no other hosting provider I tested so far can't offer uptime history of that length. The previous provider for my sites, Joe's Data Center, had once more than 300 days of uptime (and unless maintenance works be scheduled, that could last longer).

Could you name any hosting provider that can offer the uptime for the services matching or more than those mentioned?

The challenge

Although, as I mentioned, the uptime comparison is mostly a battle of egos, it also gives a certain merit to the statements of hosting providers. If no significant uptime can be guaranteed, there almost always are problems with the hardware, software, and/or personnel maintaining those.

Amazon EC2 services are not very convenient. There is still a lot of features missing or not too easy to use (native support for IPv6, real flexibility of instances resources allocation and so on), and I was looking for alternatives that could match both the price and stability of AWS EC2.

I wonder, would any hosting provider accept the challenge? The rules are simple. I should be offered VM/VPS/cloud server/whatever, matching one of the two mentioned ones (Medium VM at Blue Light Host, or Amazon Micro instance w/1 year reserved). I will install exactly the same environment and watch the VM uptime and connectivity. And if the VM in question goes down (without my restarting/shutting it down) whereas my current choice is up for longer time, I have money back for all the time I paid for alternate hosting.

Something tells me there will be few or no hosters willing to accept the challenge of uptime and connectivity. Stay tuned to know whether I am right about that.