Maybe the best thing is for Slack to simply say they had 99.9999% or 99.99999999999% uptime – or whatever makes sense for them. However, they don’t include those non-global incidents in their calculation of downtime. We can see from Slack’s own status page that they report incidents. Perhaps the issue at hand here is the simple claim of 100%. So if it’s not global, does downtime not constitute reportable downtime? Some people experience downtime while others don’t. However, everyone experiences downtime differently. Slack had pretty solid uptime for its core features over the course of Feb 2022 – Feb 2023. Perhaps the last point is the stickiest one for this conversation. Even if Slack has a narrow definition of downtime, and even if reliability of their core features is pretty rock solid – why say 100%? How does that benefit them? Orosz questioned why Slack said 100% in the first place. We didn’t experience downtime when he did and vice versa. We can even see that from the differences in Orosz’s experience and our experience.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |