# Well, That was fun.



## DavidMi

Time is still off. Saying 11pm now.


----------



## dpeters11

Things are definitely goofy. I just posted in this thread
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2833073&posted=1#post2833073

My post I just made is post 7. The time is right but should be post 12, the other posts have wrong times, making them "future" posts.

Will make threads a bit harder to follow for a while.

Didn't see David's post before making mine. But it won't happen for about 2 hours anyway


----------



## fluffybear

James Long said:


> What did people do when the site went out? _*Watch*_ TV?


Panic!


----------



## Alan Gordon

For a while there, I assumed that pictures leaked of DirecTV's new HD-GUI and it "broke" the internet... :grin:

~Alan


----------



## bobnielsen

David Bott said:


> Time fixed for now. But as you can see, because of the mess up, it now put this post first as the other posts where made in the future.


Your post is still in the future here.


----------



## SayWhat?

~:: scratches head ::~


----------



## SayWhat?

My post at 08-11-11, 03:00 AM started this thread, but the time maintenance tossed everything into the blender.


----------



## DavidMi

Looks like it messed up the number of members online too.


----------



## cypherx

Alan Gordon said:


> For a while there, I assumed that pictures leaked of DirecTV's new HD-GUI and it "broke" the internet... :grin:
> 
> ~Alan


Yeah other satellite TV and A/V sites also went out at the same time. What a coincidence lol.


----------



## David Bott

Time fixed for now. But as you can see, because of the mess up, it now put this post first as the other posts where made in the future.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Spent the day with my family at Six Flags, no moderating necessary.


----------



## Scott Kocourek

Time still 2 hours off.


----------



## Doug Brott

Posting this @ 8:25pm PT ... (test)


----------



## Doug Brott

Yup .. Shows up right for me, other than there are 3 posts posted after mine even though they were posted earlier .. :lol:


----------



## Stuart Sweet

cypherx said:


> Yeah other satellite TV and A/V sites also went out at the same time. What a coincidence lol.


Not a terrible coincidence when a lot of sites int the same data center went down.


----------



## Drucifer

James Long said:


> What did people do when the site went out? _*Watch*_ TV?


The site went down?

What happen? A time-warp bubble?


----------



## SayWhat?

Not. 

Looks like the system clock is still a bit off. Not 3:00 AM as far as I can tell.


----------



## James Long

What did people do when the site went out? _*Watch*_ TV?


----------



## MikeW

Became productive at work?


----------



## pfp

James Long said:


> What did people do when the site went out? _*Watch*_ TV?


Worse - work!


----------



## SayWhat?

Stuart Sweet said:


> Not a terrible coincidence when a lot of sites int the same data center went down.


That one I don't get. How is that possible? Isn't that part of the point of using a DC? Redundant power and servers?


----------



## David Bott

For those interested...Here the thread chat on the outage...

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1072692


----------



## SayWhat?

I don't get anything there, just the board headers, no thread pages or posts. Is it restricted?


----------



## davring

SayWhat? said:


> I don't get anything there, just the board headers, no thread pages or posts. Is it restricted?


Didn't appear to be restricted. A hole lot of people complaining about lack of redundancy.


----------



## James Long

There are a lot of complaints about the blame the customer aspect of this: "If you would've paid for more redundancy your site would not be down." (According to the linked thread, I have no personal knowledge.)

Personally, I don't know why a higher level of redundancy isn't standard. I can understand if it was the difference between choosing a data center with one level of redundancy over a different data center with a different level of redundancy. But to have different servers in the same center set up to a different level of redundancy seems complicated.

The data center where I work doesn't give people the option. Every machine gets the highest level of redundancy possible. (It is a private data center that does not offer services to the public.)

The failure seems to be the one of those things that will "never happen". Saying that in IT is a good way of guaranteeing that will happen.


----------



## Carl Spock

davring said:


> A hole lot of people complaining about lack of redundancy.

















_I'm fixing a hole where the Web came in and kept my mind from wandering where it will go-ooo_


----------



## Stuart Sweet

I think that when something like this happens, there's plenty of blame to go around. I will say that for the people who say this will cost them $45-55k for the period they were down, they must be a fairly large enterprise and should have business interruption insurance, as well they should have considered a redundant data center for that amount of volume. That doesn't absolve the data center of blame, they get their fair share too. But you know, I use a hosting service (for my personal stuff) that has had 99% uptime for the last two years. If I actually made money off the thing, I'd probably pay for someone with 99.9999% uptime. I don't, so I don't.


----------



## David Ortiz

David Bott said:


> For those interested...Here the thread chat on the outage...
> 
> http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1072692





Stuart Sweet said:


> I think that when something like this happens, there's plenty of blame to go around. I will say that for the people who say this will cost them $45-55k for the period they were down, they must be a fairly large enterprise and should have business interruption insurance, as well they should have considered a redundant data center for that amount of volume. That doesn't absolve the data center of blame, they get their fair share too. But you know, I use a hosting service (for my personal stuff) that has had 99% uptime for the last two years. If I actually made money off the thing, I'd probably pay for someone with 99.9999% uptime. I don't, so I don't.


I was following the thread about the outage yesterday and I swear some of the posts read just like the ones in the HD Anticipation thread.


----------



## carlsbad_bolt_fan

James Long said:


> There are a lot of complaints about the blame the customer aspect of this: "If you would've paid for more redundancy your site would not be down." (According to the linked thread, I have no personal knowledge.)
> 
> Personally, I don't know why a higher level of redundancy isn't standard. I can understand if it was the difference between choosing a data center with one level of redundancy over a different data center with a different level of redundancy. But to have different servers in the same center set up to a different level of redundancy seems complicated.
> 
> The data center where I work doesn't give people the option. Every machine gets the highest level of redundancy possible. (It is a private data center that does not offer services to the public.)
> 
> The failure seems to be the one of those things that will "never happen". Saying that in IT is a good way of guaranteeing that will happen.


In my 20+ years of working in the MIS/IT field, I have learned this mantra:

Never say 'never'. For if you do, your life suddenly becomes complicated for a minimum of 4 hours.


----------



## SayWhat?

I'm not sure which datacenter this was. All I was getting from the WhoIs lookups was Carrolton, TX. In the past, I've used both The Planet and Savvis with no down time at all to speak of. I see some articles on the web about outages at The Planet, but for whatever reason, they didn't affect my sites. I think I've been on Savvis for 6 or 7 years without a noticeable outage.


----------



## Kevin F

This happened to me last night too. It was a little past midnight and for some of the threads, some of the last posts were at 4:21 AM. This was on my iPhone.

Kevin


----------



## Nick

CMEs raining down upon us.

I was in my garden hoeing potatoes when a CME hit -- my once _lilly-white_ skin darkened three shades. ▒ ▓ █


----------



## dmurphy

Nick said:


> CMEs raining down upon us.
> 
> I was in my garden hoeing potatoes when a CME hit -- my once _lilly-white_ skin darkened three shades. ▒ ▓ █


I'll take a CME over an RGE any day....

And this co-lo outage, if it happened where I work... would be an RGE.


----------



## James Long

dmurphy said:


> I'll take a CME over an RGE any day....
> 
> And this co-lo outage, if it happened where I work... would be an RGE.


CME = Corrective Maintenance Exercise
RGE = Resume Generating Event

???


----------



## SayWhat?

Hmmm, I thought CME was Coronal Mass Ejection.


----------



## James Long

SayWhat? said:


> Hmmm, I thought CME was Coronal Mass Ejection.


That would make sense ... although the current CME event had nothing to do with the outage.


----------

