←back to thread

693 points hienyimba | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.218s | source
Show context
Zarathu ◴[] No.28523069[source]
I really feel for the author. We had once decided to participate in Stripe's Identity Verification beta. After submitting the form to request participation, Stripe's system locked our account pending verification.

We were fortunate in that we had a backup payment gateway integration "just in case", because otherwise we would have been completely unable to accept any payments at all for a full week.

That week was still extremely stressful. They offered no explanation or reason for putting our entire business on hold.

replies(3): >>28523430 #>>28523465 #>>28524024 #
Spare_account ◴[] No.28523430[source]
>We were fortunate in that we had a backup payment gateway integration "just in case"

This seems like the key point here. I'm not a software guy or even a payments guy, I'm a network infrastructure engineer.

For anything that we want more than 99% uptime, we put in two of everything, sometimes more. Two separate service providers, ideally coming down different physical paths where practical.

replies(3): >>28523569 #>>28523576 #>>28526379 #
1. wting ◴[] No.28526379[source]
It's not possible to increase availability with redundancy in all cases, because not all financial actions are idempotent.

For example, sending money via a banking wire. If the bank goes down, you can't send a second wire through another bank without loss because the first wire is not retractable.