couchdb-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Charette <ioma...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Hosting Preference
Date Wed, 13 Mar 2013 00:45:15 GMT
I figured you guys were under fire.  Glad to hear you are on the other side of that.  I am
still on and sticking with iris and probably will use cloudant too eventually.  I hope my
questions didn't cause any issues, just had to launch 6 months of work and I myself am under
that support load as we speak.  Looking forward to the premium service when you guys get to
it.  

Also, anything I can do to help, let me know.  We are a lot better at design than development.
Jeff Charette | Principal 
We Are Charette
web / identity / packaging

m  415.298.2707
w  wearecharette.com
e   jeffrey@wearecharette.com

On Mar 12, 2013, at 8:21 PM, Jason Smith <jhs@iriscouch.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 2:01 AM, Jeff Charette <iomatix@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
>> What is your CouchDB host preference?  Here has been my experience which
>> leaves me as a loss for hosted services.
>> 
>> Cloudant
>> - doesn't support newest couch techniques like require and I can't find a
>> tutorial to port my couch app.
>> 
>> Iriscouch (currently using)
>> -  I have nothing but love for these guys, but have had a lot of issues
>> lately.  I've requested an upgrade with no response unfortunetly.
>> - they are on 1.2.1 which would be great, but 1.2.1 has a big issue which
>> has been fixed for 1.2.2
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1651
> 
> 
> Thanks for your love. Regarding Iris Couch, I am biased; but I myself have
> nothing but love for the people at Cloudant, too. Of course, ultimately,
> you don't need people, you need the stuff they make and do (i.e. CouchDB
> service).
> 
> You are right that we have had issues lately. We've always had random
> failures; but this is the first time things have gotten bad enough that
> general users felt prolonged slowness or unavailability.
> 
> Long story short: these issues are behind us and we are back to our
> well-known quality of service.
> 
> I thought our failure would be a boring story, but maybe I'll tell it
> anyway.
> 
> The big problem was that we failed to support people, not that we failed to
> run software. Do you know how lots of stuff runs just fine from 0% to about
> 90% or 95% capacity, then it collapses horribly (e.g. memory, filesystems,
> disk i/o)? We experienced a similar collapse with customer support.
> 
> The past two weeks, due to vacations and traveling engineers, we were doing
> less regular maintenance than usual. Then, also randomly, a few machines
> crashed badly. As a sysadmin I like CouchDB, because only safe operations
> are allowed. (For example, CouchDB has no JOINs, therefore every read
> operation is guaranteed to complete in logarithmic time.) That is usually
> the situation; however there is still the occasional memory leak or out of
> control process or whatever. Anyway, we exhausted memory on several
> machines which crashed many people's couches.
> 
> That's fine; but the real collapse happened when everybody began to inquire
> about their server. Fixing stuff over SSH is quick, but supporting people
> takes much more time. When we saw the support volume spike, I decided to
> enter triage mode: make a priority list of technical and personal
> obligations and work from the top down.
> 
> All software has real-time constraints. In fact, all human activity has
> real-time constraints. Right? Right? Hello? Hello! Can you hear me? After a
> certain time, if something is not done, it may as well never be done. That
> is how I approached our support load.
> 
> I have learned from many trusted advisors (Hi, Jan and Noah and everyone!)
> that "support load" is a terrible phrase. CPU load is CPU load; but
> "support load" is people. So, I have learned my lesson, and we are now
> working through the entire backlog. Some people emailed to tell us
> nevermind, they had moved to Cloudant. I think they wanted to twist the
> knife a bit, to blow off steam. Okay, but that put them near the bottom of
> our priority list (they are no longer using the service; outstanding issues
> are moot). However they are still people. We will be emailing even them, to
> say the issue has been resolved. If you ask a question, I should respond,
> otherwise it's rude.
> 
> -- 
> Iris Couch


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message