Network Computing is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Amazon S3 Crash Raises Doubts Among Cloud Customers: Page 2 of 2

In the AWS S3 forum, other S3 users were more critical.

"I've been using S3 to serve up Flash files for about six months, and am now relying more and more on my own infrastructure because of the issues that I have had over the last two months," wrote someone posting under the name "David Campano."

"I was under the apparently false impression that S3 was a high-availability service," wrote someone posting under the name "iehiapk." "We may have to evaluate other services now. This makes us look like a bunch of amateurs."

"I am going to stick with them more than likely, but I will be implementing another service similar to theirs that we can fall back on in cases like this," said someone posting under the name "M. McQuade." "We already have an internal backup, but that will be harder to scale when our storage needs increase. We'll need to have two 'S3s.'"

Other S3 users complained about the S3 Service Level Agreement (SLA), which requires that customers who want a service credit have to apply for the refund via e-mail. "We should not have to e-mail Amazon to receive SLA credit," said someone posting under the name "Sam Beckett." "It should be automated for everyone."

The S3 SLA specifies that for monthly uptime of less than 99%, customers are entitled to a service credit of 25%. Amazon couldn't provide a single monthly uptime figure because the number varies for each customer. With 744 hours in July, any outage longer than 7.44 hours means monthly uptime of less than 99%.

According to the S3 status page, all is well at the moment.