Tina - AxisHOST, Inc. wrote:
> "Gandalf Parker" <gandalf@most.of.my.favorite.sites> wrote in message
> Xns969F4947F8C52gandalfparker@208.201.224.154">news:Xns969F4947F8C52gandalfparker@208.201.224.154...
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@schestowitz.com> wrote in
>> dc5f8o$2bn9$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk:">news:dc5f8o$2bn9$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk:
>>
>>> 5 years with no downtime whatsoever is unrealistic. No matter where
>>> you are, there tend to be accidental power shortages or network
>>> cut-offs. Tamlyn would know that a main wire was cut off by a builder
>>> last year in Manchester. Then there's the issue of reboot, which might
>>> result in a downtime of a few minutes. Even though my host is up over
>>> 99.9% of the time, I can still observe these reboots on occasions.
>>> They claim to have had 100% uptime for a year, but it's based on
>>> sampling, which I know reflects badly on the truth.
>>
>> True. I meant to add something along the line of 99.9%
>
> That's a huge amount of downtime. I think that translates into something
> like a couple hours a month?
"Over 99.9%" also accounts for 99.999%. I think the downtime I experience is
verging the orders of magnitude of 99.99%... but then again, servers become
more reliable as time goes on.
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com
|
|
