5 ms·

> precautions when taking destructive actions. No data was lost, it is not destructive in anyway. > because of some automated heuristic. If the customer ha

> precautions when taking destructive actions. No data was lost, it is not destructive in anyway. > because of some automated heuristic. If the customer had "payment history" none of this would have happened. Probably it was being used under "startup credits" > people host their businesses and livelihoods on cloud providers people shouldn't run entire operation on credits and blame DO in twitter. Only issue is that DO took 29 hours, apart from that i see no problem with DO.

pbreit 7y ago
It should be pretty hard to shit down a legit biz. Seemed automatic in this case.
- pbreit 7y ago
  Edit: shut
- gavindean90 7y ago
  I mean it is. Unless your business is wholly dependent on a service from my business.
icebraining 7y ago
> people shouldn't run entire operation on credits Why not? Until now, I wouldn't have considered that using credits might make me a second-class customer. They should at least be upfront about that.
scarejunba 7y ago
What? We use a few million dollars in GCP credits every month.
dkersten 7y ago
> No data was lost, it is not destructive in anyway. Except in the way that the guy may[1] have lost customers or revenue due to the downtime. Being offline, even without data loss, is very destructive for many businesses. [1] I don't know anything about his business.
computerex 7y ago
> No data was lost, it is not destructive in anyway. Tell that to the owner who was begging DO for their data back on Twitter. Again, had this not blown up on twitter nothing would have been done. > If the customer had "payment history" none of this would have happened. Probably it was being used under "startup credits" What's your point in saying this?? The fact is that the customer faced downtime because of a bug in DO's code. > people shouldn't run entire operation on credits and blame DO in twitter. Are you saying that customers on credits aren't subject to SLA's? > Only issue is that DO took 29 hours, apart from that i see no problem with DO. I think you seem very biased.

pbreit 7y ago

It should be pretty hard to shit down a legit biz. Seemed automatic in this case.

pbreit 7y ago
Edit: shut
gavindean90 7y ago
I mean it is. Unless your business is wholly dependent on a service from my business.

icebraining 7y ago

> people shouldn't run entire operation on credits Why not? Until now, I wouldn't have considered that using credits might make me a second-class customer. They should at least be upfront about that.

scarejunba 7y ago

What? We use a few million dollars in GCP credits every month.

dkersten 7y ago

> No data was lost, it is not destructive in anyway. Except in the way that the guy may[1] have lost customers or revenue due to the downtime. Being offline, even without data loss, is very destructive for many businesses. [1] I don't know anything about his business.

computerex 7y ago

> No data was lost, it is not destructive in anyway. Tell that to the owner who was begging DO for their data back on Twitter. Again, had this not blown up on twitter nothing would have been done. > If the customer had "payment history" none of this would have happened. Probably it was being used under "startup credits" What's your point in saying this?? The fact is that the customer faced downtime because of a bug in DO's code. > people shouldn't run entire operation on credits and blame DO in twitter. Are you saying that customers on credits aren't subject to SLA's? > Only issue is that DO took 29 hours, apart from that i see no problem with DO. I think you seem very biased.