According to Royal Pingdom, Yahoo! website never went down in 2007 but Youtube and Blogger, both Google properties, were unavailable for atleast four hours during the same period.
1 yahoo.com 0mWould you agree with the website downtime numbers published in the Pingdom report ?
2 google.com 7m
6 youtube.com 4h 44m
12 blogger.com 4h 47m
16 cnn.com 22m
19 flickr.com 30m
For instance, their GMail downtime log says that gmail.google.com has been up 100% of the time since September 2006. Anyone using GMail may have a hard time digesting those figures.
Then take the case of Blogger.com - Blogger unavailable for just 4 hours in the past 3 months ?
Check the official Blogger Status page or this post on Techcrunch - both suggest that the downtime expected by Blogger was much higher than the number suggested by Pingdom.
The report is a good indicator of how these popular website fair in comparison to each other but the exact downtime numbers could be on the higher side.
But it does clearly hint that Google needs a better infrastructure for their non-search services like GMail, Orkut and Youtube, all of them command a massive user base.
Reader Comments
Hii,
I would't agree about Google downtime. I can belive on others.
Nice share..
Best Regards,
Eliena Andrews
http://visitformoney.blgospot.com
Written on 3/4/07 4:38 PM
You also need to consider the fact that there is a slight difference between blogger being down or not running.
The stats only show when the server was not responding. What that doesn't show is when blogger simply turns off the control panel while they work. Those numbers are not counted.
Written on 3/4/07 7:25 PM
Amit, you are confusing between web server downtime and service downtime.
For example, Gmail server was up and running for 100% of the time but the ability to login and access mail was not available for 100% of the time.
Uptime trackers normally only do a ping and verify that things are fine (obviously not a correct indication!)
Written on 3/4/07 7:52 PM