←back to thread

797 points burnerbob | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
throwaway220033 ◴[] No.36810259[source]
The worst thing about Fly is, when something goes wrong, it's not just one thing, there's bunch of things broken at the same time and their status page will show everything green.

Their typical response is either silence or so casual ("oh this is what happens we deploy on friday"). The product looks amazing but it's just a nice package around the most unreliable hosting service I've ever used.

You can't just keep breaking people's work every once a week, make them spend their weekend nights trying to bring back their stuff, and give these "we could have done better" answers. This is an excuse for exceptions, not patterns.

replies(2): >>36811046 #>>36811783 #
stephenr ◴[] No.36811783[source]
> when something goes wrong, it's not just one thing, there's bunch of things broken at the same time and their status page will show everything green

How dare they use AWS' patented approach to having a service outage.

replies(2): >>36812560 #>>36814346 #
1. ctvo ◴[] No.36814346[source]
I wouldn’t put AWS and Fly in the same sentence. AWS is magnitudes more reliable, with better support.
replies(1): >>36814367 #
2. stephenr ◴[] No.36814367[source]
I didn't mention how often they fail.

I merely mentioned two characteristics of how they fail, that are spectacularly shit.