Including Everything Blog

Posts Tagged ‘mosso’

It’s inevitable that a web host is going to experience downtime at some point. There’s little in the way of inexpensive options that will deliver true redundancy that wins over all possible failure paths a data center can experience in keeping a website or application online 24/7/365.

However, Mosso has claimed to have accomplished this feat for the past two years. For the most part, this has been true. I’ve pinged and tested websites hosted with Mosso, finding that while they are not necessarily the fastest host out there, I’ve chosen them to be able to withstand nearly any load we can throw at it.

But issues like today I am at a loss for words for. It’s nothing new either. I’ve called in, fully understanding that there’s an issue they’re experiencing, and simply need an “estimated time of resolution”. I’m not asking for anything definitive, but the generic run-around that I typically get reminds me of experiences from early web hosts (who shall be nameless for the time being). This is not typical Rackspace behavior and I think should be treated differently. You don’t put the reseller of your services on the back burner and play the silent game. It sets a bad precedent for your reputation handling customers.

The post from today in the Mosso status area.

So obviously I’m concerned about where Mosso is headed. I was quite literally about to rant about how amazed I am at their Cloud Files offering, however, it’s hard to praise and rant on the same day most of our websites are down. We pay a premium price for shared hosting which is supposed to be redundant enough that these types of embarrasing outages are 

I love the Rackspace brand, company, people, services…everything about it. But Mosso’s starting to test my patience and I’m beginning to doubt if their Cloud Sites service will ever be truly stable and ready for prime time. To compare, I have had a single processor server without issues live at The Planet for nearly a year and a half, not once down. If my little server beats out Mosso’s uptime hands down, why pay the extra buck for a service that hasn’t proven itself?

I’ve ranted about the “cloud” idea for a while in relation to Media Temple and Amazon S3. This post wasn’t originally intended to be a Mosso bashing. I’m a huge Rackspace fan. But they’re not proving themselves bulletproof in terms of uptime so far. Many issues have arisen, and I’m not sold on them as the most stable option for my hosting needs.

Bruce Runyan is the chief uptime officer for Mosso. I’d be interested to get a public statement posted here explaining why things like this happen when the idea behind this type of hosting is so that this doesn’t happen in the first place. To simply avoid calling clients that actually noticed the outage and not provide helpful information other than “We’re working on it” isn’t the answer paying clients are looking for.

So let’s extend this to other hosting situations beyond just Mosso with a few questions.

1. Are you with a host that doesn’t give the full picture?
2. How have you experienced uptime with them?
3. Is uptime or load processing more important?
4. Has the “cloud” idea disappointed you?
5. When will we finally be ready to trust it?

For the record, I’ve been overall blown away with SliceHost (although not Rackspace’s original idea), whome Rackspace aquired recently, and their uptime. I haven’t experienced a single issue with them and I was picky as hell when I contacted the owners out of skepticism a month ago. SliceHost technology will soon become Rackspace’s Cloud Servers offering.

Other related information:
Mosso.com – Information Thread on WebHostingTalk
Rackspace appoints chief uptime officer at Mosso

So a couple days from the last outage, here we go again with Mosso.  At this point, I have executives knowing about the issue and I’m pulling our site away from Mosso.  We host newsletter content, portfolios and other things that need to be “up”.  Having content linked from an HTML newsletter go offline 10 minutes after sending a newsletter mailing sucks, and that’s happened to me before with Mosso.

Yes, pun was intended.

I have serious doubts about the “cloud” computing concept recently and that it’s a failed concept.  We have yet to see a successful execution of the cloud hosting idea to the point where there is a stable solution in place with such a level of redundancy that applications and websites are not down for any reason.  I’ve experienced outages with Mosso lately that I’ve become discontent with.  The reasoning behind choosing a company like Media Temple, Mosso or Amazon EC2 services is so that you are not experiencing downtime…ever.  

I’m stuck in a difficult place, because I realize the outage discovery phase’s necessity in determining a cause of failure, however, it’s been hours and nobody’s found anything…that sorta causes you to wonder if the idea of cloud computing really works (or at least if it’s been implemented correctly at the datacenter layer).  I know that things don’t just break on their own typically, and so I’m curious if someone rolled out an update that went bad, a switch dead (hey, hardware fails – I get it).  My next question would be: “why did they roll it out before testing in a beta environment?”.

I have optimistically waited for stability in the Mosso cloud hosting service that we’re unfortunately realizing is not there.  Maybe someday down the line it will be, but we’re faced with a scenario where I spoke up for Mosso to sell it to us internally since I have long-favored the Rackspace brand.  I figured that with Rackspace’s financial and infrastructure backing, that it might come with the same types of safety nets we’ve become used to with Rackspace in terms of high availability application hosting.

I’m not normally one to pull the plug inadvertently, but this has become somewhat habitual (8 incidents within the past 7-day week).  Those aren’t exactly excellent percentages.  I think instead of the SliceHost purchase and rolling out of the CloudFS service, Rackspace should be focusing on the stability of the current idea/concept of cloud hosting to make it rock solid before presuming to add more services to a foundation that hasn’t proven itself as 100% stable.

I have a lot of love for the Rackspace family and have been working with their teams both directly and indirectly for 7+ years.  I don’t intend to bow out completely, but I’m not sure it’s logical for us to continue to place trust in Mosso with the types of outages this past 3-6 months.

Maybe I have an incorrect view of what cloud hosting actually is supposed to be.  I imagine that if one piece of the equation is unavailable, that the others failover pieces are are able to serve content, justifying that the services are never really offline to the end user requesting the content.  In my opinion, no services can come offline using this method.  The idea that there is an infrastructure so robust in place behind the scenes is one that will execute this properly.

What do you think?