Comment by TheTaytay
1 day ago
I’ve seen a few smug “all your eggs in one basket” comments here.
I’m aware of some companies hosting their own metal and infra, but I’m not aware of large companies mitigating risk by hosting on separate cloud providers as a fallback mechanism. We might disagree with cloud provider choice, or think they should have been hosting their own metal, but that’s still an “all your eggs in one basket” choice, right?
Heck, they might even have multi-region fallback with GCP, but if GCP bans your account, that doesn’t matter.
Are there good examples of running a company of railway’s size so redundantly that their host could nuke one of their accounts and they’d just keep on trucking?
They do run their own metal. That’s their entire ethos. Railway is their own cloud.
Just google multi-cloud. Yes. It's a thing.
99% of multi-cloud is fake though. True multi-cloud is incredibly rare.
I appreciate it. That's my belief as well. Very easy to write a post like, "Just use multiple clouds!" or to claim to have done it with a small project. But it's hard for me to imagine the benefits outweighing the extremely massive complexity costs at a certain scale.