Skip to content

Comment on AWS Post-Mortem

Comments

The thing I wonder about is wtf they didn't manually switch to generator when their automatic controls failed. They had presumably ~5 minutes of UPS; it took them 40 minutes to do this. This probably isn't directly Amazon's fault, but whatever contract datacenter they are using in Europe (probably a PTT, or possibly an international carrier; really curious what facility)

I'm wary of using >1 generators to back up loads, thus requiring sync on generators for backup anyway -- much more comfortable with splitting the load up by room and having one generator per, with some kind of switch to allow for pulling generators out for maintenance. This pretty much limits you to 2-3MW per room (the largest economical diesel gensets), but that's not horrible.

Really high reliability sites actually run onsite generation as PRIMARY (since it's less reliable to start), and then utility as backup. With the right onsite generation equipment, it can be cheaper/more efficient than the grid, too (by using combined cycle; use heat output to run cooling directly).

Still, the 365 Main power outages take the cake; they used rotational UPSes (generators with huge flywheels) which had software bugs such that if input power got turned off and on several times (a common utility failure mode), the unit shut itself off entirely. Doh.

They explained that a ground fault prevented generators from delivering power. Manual start doesn't help in that case.

From what I read, they said ground fault confused their PLCs (synchro gear for paralleling multiple generators). This shouldn't affect the generator (engine, generator) outputting power.

Electronics are much more sensitive to ground faults, etc. than mechanical and electrical devices.

A big manual transfer switch (as backup), which is presumably what they ended up using, is fairly bulletproof.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.