Google, it's not the 'scheduled' downtime we worry about

Upgraded guarantee means better records, not more uptime

Google realizes it has a long way to go to establish itself with big companies as a serious provider of enterprise apps by promising no 'scheduled' downtime for Google Apps.

That sounds good in one sense; it takes a lot of planning to make sure you can transfer your whole workload to a backup when it comes time for unavoidable upgrades to specific servers, storage or whole data centers.

It's not as good a promise as it sounds, though. Google isn't really changing its service or actually becoming more reliable. It's changing the terms of its Service Level Agreement (SLA) so that even outages of 10 minutes or less -- which it had been able to just ignore before -- are counted against the 99.9 percent uptime guarantee it offers for business users.

Have you ever been in a big-company data center going through 10 minutes of downtime for an important app?

It's exciting. Not in a good way.

People get fired for 10 minutes of downtime. Agreeing to write them down instead of forget about them doesn't really scream "enterprise quality."

Google's 99.9 percent guarantee, or even the "five-nines" uptime guarantee that was common among co-location, hosting and data-center services companies a few years ago isn't enough.

Big companies -- and SMBs to an even greater degree -- rely so heavily on their critical applications that 99.999 percent uptime isn't enough. That metric is giving way to "continuous availability," resilience and "continual operation."

Real enterprise apps have to be up essentially all the time, and the data centers they live in have to be power- and carbon-efficient as well.

That's an unreasonable standard if you're dealing with purely physical servers and infrastructures. If you add in virtual servers and clouds that are designed to keep servers running by mirroring and migrating specific workloads, adding CPU or memory to virtual machines that need them and fail over physical servers from the primary site to a secondary in 10 seconds -- not 10 minutes -- it's more possible.

Google's not trying to compete with IBM or Rackspace or Teramark, though.

It's trying to compete with Microsoft, especially Exchange, for which 10 minutes of downtime isn't a disaster, it's a relief.

This whole topic's unfair, anyway. Anyone who's ever searched knows Google never goes down.

If it doesn't respond it's more likely your Internet connection than Google that's the problem, right?

Right. Why even worry about 10 measly minutes?

What’s wrong? The new clean desk test
Join the discussion
Be the first to comment on this article. Our Commenting Policies