[rsanheim]

I wonder what kind of outage or incident or economic change will be required to cause a rejection of the big commercial clouds as the default deployment model.

The costs, performance overhead, and complexity of a modern AWS deployment are insane and so out of line with what most companies should be taking on. But hype + microservices + sunk cost, and here we are.

[babl-yc]

I don't expect the majority of tech companies to want to run their own physical data centers. I do expect them to shift to more bare-metal offerings.

If I'm a mid to large size company built on DynamoDB, I'd be questioning if it's really worth the risk given this 12+ hour outage.

I'd rather build upon open source tooling on bare metal instances and control my own destiny, than hope that Amazon doesn't break things as they scale to serve a database to host the entire internet.

For big companies, it's probably a cost savings too.

[baobabKoodaa]

> For big companies, it's probably a cost savings too.

For any sized company, moving away from big clouds back onto traditional VPS or bare-metal offerings will lead to cost savings.

[newZWhoDis]

Honest answer? The outage would need to last about a week.