Have you had recent downtime issues too? (7x in 1 week, NJ)
On 6/26, there was the Newark connectivity issue
Then, today 6/27, I had my 7th downtime, this time for 20 minutes: "The host where your Linode resides (Newark476) required an emergency reboot as it stopped responding to our monitoring."
From the sparse information I have gotten from support, it doesn't appear that the issue has anything to do with my own configuration, but with issues with the underlying host & datacenter, but I haven't really gotten any meaningful responses from support other than things are back up. Is there some known issue that is being addressed?
I'm getting very discouraged, and it would at least help me feel better to hear that other people have had as many downtime issues a I have had recently. My sites consist of some static web content and a mediawiki install, but it's very important to me that these remain accessible since they're used in hospitals. For people who have had experiences like this in the past, how did you handle it and hopefully get to a more stable situation? Has Linode credited your account for the downtimes that you've experienced? Does anybody know why Newark, NJ has been having so many stability issues as of late?
9 Replies
As for being credited, linode's TOS state Uptime Guarantee
Linode.com provides a 99.99% uptime guarantee on all Linode hardware, and on network connectivity. In any given month, if your Linode is down for more than 0.1%, you may request a pro-rated credit for the down-time.
It sounds like you've had some really back luck, I've been here..3 years now (I think) and I've had servers in all DCs except tokyo, they've all had issues at some point but only about one or two each (in 3 years thats not bad) and they're never for very long, there was a spat of problems in Fremont some time ago but they seem to have been fixed now.
To echo the other comments, Linode is a very good provider most of the time. These 49x machine issues in Newark are not at all common.
@fuzzman442:
FWIW, I think Newark is by far the most troublesome Linode datacenter. I realize some people need that geographic location. But if you don't, maybe try for Dallas. I have been there for a few years. The downtime is very, very minimal, in my experience. Newark seems to have bad mojo.
Sincere question – why do you think Newark is the most troublesome? I don't use it myself, so I'm rather insulated, but I do pay attention, and as far as I can remember Newark has never had a major issue (power failures, lengthy widespread network outages, explosions, etc.), just the usual array of hardware failures, DDoSes, clogged tubes and fiber-seeking backhoes.
I'd also agree that Dallas is rock solid it's the first DC I ever had and it's only had one issue I can remember.
@fuzzman442:
FWIW, I think Newark is by far the most troublesome Linode datacenter.
Those who dealt with the power issues in Freemont a while back would beg to differ.
@obs:
I'd also agree that Dallas is rock solid it's the first DC I ever had and it's only had one issue I can remember.
I actually thought about choosing Dallas since I thought it would be the US site least likely to be affected by weather, natural disasters, or power outage issues, and my users are equally split between the West and East coasts. However, I saw that Newark and Dallas both didn't seem to have a history of issues, so I ended up picking the one that is closer to me.
@yaz:
@obs:I'd also agree that Dallas is rock solid it's the first DC I ever had and it's only had one issue I can remember.
I actually thought about choosing Dallas since I thought it would be the US site least likely to be affected by weather, natural disasters, or power outage issues, and my users are equally split between the West and East coasts. However, I saw that Newark and Dallas both didn't seem to have a history of issues, so I ended up picking the one that is closer to me.
That's exactly why I chose Dallas!