Consensus on using Amazon EC2 for high volume sites

[D. Hugh Redelmeier]

| From: Scott Elcomb <psema4-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w at public.gmane.org>

| On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Myles Braithwaite
| <me-qIX3qoPyADtH8hdXm2+x1laTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
| > Also don't be like this guy[3] who put critical patients ECG machines on EC2.
| >
| > [3]: <https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?threadID=65649&tstart=0>
| 
| Score one for cloud stupidity. I'd like to say that I can't believe a
| business doing internet-based cardiac monitoring would be so careless
| & negligent. I wonder what their insurance package looks like.

In my mind, there are so many moving parts in today's systems that it
is hard to imagine them being reliable.  Or even understanding all the
risks.

Single points of failure probably litter this guy's system.  It's easy
to point at the Amazon system as being one.  Especially after the
fact.  But that might be well down on the list of risks based on
probablility.

Number one: last-mile internet failure.
Number two: power failure.
Number zero: some bug in the code.

It is amazing how much health care isn't even up to "best effort"
standards.
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists