Learn how Palo Alto Networks is Transforming Platform Engineering with AI Agents. Register here
Register now
December 4, 2024
September 24, 2024
December 4, 2024
September 24, 2024
Optimize compute, storage and data
Choose copilot or autopilot execution
Continuously improve with reinforcement learning
Outages are costly. More than half (54%) of the 2023 Uptime Institute data center survey respondents say their most recent significant, serious, or severe outage cost more than $100,000, with 16% saying that their most recent outage cost more than $1 million. With the rise of always-on, globally distributed systems, downtime can lead to substantial financial losses, reputational damage, and customer dissatisfaction. This is why businesses across industries—from cloud service providers to e-commerce platforms—prioritize maximizing uptime to ensure their systems remain operational as much as possible.
System availability measurement involves understanding uptime vs. downtime, which directly impacts a company’s ability to meet service-level agreements (SLAs) and customer expectations. Calculating availability allows organizations to assess accurately how often their systems are accessible to users. This calculation becomes crucial for identifying potential risks, optimizing system performance, and improving customer satisfaction in an era when even a few minutes of downtime can significantly impact a business's bottom line.
To stay competitive, businesses must have precise methods for tracking system uptime, pinpointing failures, and improving performance. By having an accurate system availability measurement, companies can avoid disruptions and enhance their infrastructure's reliability and efficiency.
Source: Availability
System availability refers to the probability that a system is fully operational and accessible when needed rather than simply during a set time frame. This metric emphasizes the time a system functions and whether it is available during critical operational periods. Availability is calculated as the percentage of time a system can perform its intended functions without undergoing failure or repair.
The system availability formula is typically expressed as:
However, this formula is not solely time-based; it also considers whether the system is operational when required. For example, if a system is only needed during specific production hours, availability should reflect its performance during those crucial periods, not simply over 24 hours.
A system’s availability heavily depends on the condition of its equipment. Functioning equipment is defined as components not undergoing repair or inspection, allowing them to perform their designated tasks. When equipment is down for maintenance, it directly impacts system uptime, making it crucial to maintain machinery proactively to avoid unexpected breakdowns.
A system must also operate under normal conditions to be fully available. This means that the equipment should run in an ideal environment at its expected rate without facing any external disruptions. Variability in environmental, operational, or process-based conditions can compromise the system’s ability to function optimally, affecting availability.
One key aspect of system availability is on-demand functioning. Systems are required to be operational when they are scheduled for production or service. Availability is less concerned with overall uptime and more focused on whether the system performs when needed. This distinction is critical because even highly available systems may only meet operational requirements if they function during scheduled production periods.
By taking a more holistic approach to measuring availability—considering both time-based and interaction-based methods—businesses can ensure that their systems are reliable when needed.
Source: Calculating total system availability
System availability can be calculated using two main approaches: the traditional time-based method and the event-based method. Each method provides valuable insights depending on the type of system being measured, whether it’s hardware, software, or a service-oriented infrastructure. Understanding both methods allows businesses to perform an availability calculation more comprehensively, ensuring systems are operational when needed.
The time-based method measures availability based on how long a system is operational relative to its downtime. The formula for this calculation is:
For example, a software system operates for 200 hours a month but experiences 10 hours of downtime due to maintenance and unexpected failures. The availability calculation would be:
This method is straightforward and commonly used for measuring availability in hardware systems, but it may only partially capture the complexities of modern software environments.
For software systems, availability must often be evaluated based on customer interactions or events rather than time alone. The event-based approach measures availability by calculating the percentage of successful interactions (e.g., API requests, database queries) from total interactions during a given period.
The formula for event-based availability is as follows:
For instance, if a cloud-based application processes 10,000 API requests in a given time frame and 100 of those requests fail, the availability calculation would be:
This method provides a more granular understanding of system performance, especially in distributed and cloud-based software systems, where downtime may only affect a subset of users or services.
In the software industry, high availability is often measured by how many "nines" are achieved, reflecting minimal downtime:
Achieving high availability, especially four or five nines, is considered world-class and often a benchmark for mission-critical systems like cloud platforms or financial services, where even minor disruptions can have major consequences.
Source: Is there a better way to measure system availability?
Measuring system availability is only sometimes straightforward, especially when dealing with complex distributed systems. While traditional tracking of uptime vs downtime provides useful insights, modern systems often have many moving parts, from multiple servers to diverse software components. Each piece can experience different levels of availability, making it difficult to achieve a comprehensive view.
One of the primary challenges in measuring availability across distributed systems is that these systems are composed of multiple interdependent components, each with its uptime and potential for failure. For example, a payment processing system like PayPal might consist of various services, including authentication, transaction processing, and fraud detection. Each service might have different levels of availability, and failure in one service can cause a cascade of failures across the entire system.
The complexity increases further when systems operate across multiple data centers or cloud regions, where factors like network latency, regional outages, and traffic loads must be considered. These systems can experience partial failures—where some services remain functional while others are degraded—making calculating an accurate availability percentage challenging.
Solution: One approach to managing availability in distributed systems is implementing redundant components and failover mechanisms. Redundancy helps ensure that if one component fails, another can take over its role, increasing overall system availability. For example, having backup servers or leveraging multi-cloud strategies can minimize the impact of regional failures.
Source: Understanding availability
Another key challenge is collecting availability metrics from both the server and client sides. From the infrastructure perspective, server-side metrics measure how well the system performs, such as how many requests are processed successfully by the servers. However, server-side data may not capture client-side issues, where users experience failed interactions due to network problems or geographic limitations, even if the servers are fully operational.
Businesses need to measure both perspectives for a complete picture of system availability. Client-side metrics can be gathered using canary deployments or synthetic monitoring, where test requests simulate real-user traffic to identify potential issues before they impact a broader audience. This provides insight into the user experience of availability, helping organizations catch problems that may not appear in server-side logs.
Solution: Combine server-side monitoring tools (e.g., AWS CloudWatch, Google Stackdriver) with client-side monitoring (e.g., canaries, real-user monitoring) to gain a holistic view of system health. This dual approach ensures that infrastructure and user experience are factored into an availability calculation.
Consider a payment processing system like PayPal, which has several interrelated services: authentication, transaction processing, and fraud detection. These services must be highly available to ensure smooth transactions, but they can fail independently. For example, the transaction processing service might be fully functional, while the authentication service experiences issues, preventing users from completing payments.
In this scenario, server-side monitoring might show high availability for transaction processing, but client-side metrics could reveal that users cannot complete transactions due to authentication failures. This discrepancy highlights the need for comprehensive monitoring across all services from server and client perspectives.
Solution: Organizations can implement Service Level Objectives (SLOs) for each component and track availability metrics for individual services. Businesses can proactively address issues before they affect the broader system by using service-level dashboards and integrating alerts when any part of the system fails to meet its SLOs.
Accurately measuring system availability is critical for maintaining operational efficiency and ensuring a seamless user experience. There are two primary methods for measuring system availability: server-side metrics, which focus on infrastructure and service health, and client-side metrics, which simulate customer interactions to assess the true availability from the user’s perspective. These methods work in tandem to provide a comprehensive view of a system’s availability.
Server-side metrics refer to data collected from the system’s infrastructure, such as application servers, databases, and network components. These metrics provide insights into the performance and health of the system's services. For example, server-side instrumentation can track successful API requests, server response times, and error codes.
However, more than server-side metrics are needed to give the complete picture, as they focus only on how well the backend services are operating. If a server runs smoothly but users cannot access it due to client-side issues like network latency, these problems will not be captured. Therefore, while server-side data is essential, it must be paired with client-side monitoring to assess availability comprehensively.
Client-side metrics simulate user interactions with the system, providing insight into the end-user experience. One method to gather these metrics is to use canary tests—small-scale, real-time simulations of customer traffic that evaluate availability based on how successfully requests are processed.
By simulating actual user conditions, client-side metrics can capture issues such as geographic service outages, latency from the user's perspective, or failed transactions due to client-side errors that server-side instrumentation might miss. For example, while the server might process a request successfully, high latency or connectivity issues can still cause client-side failures, which would only be detectable through these simulated traffic tests.
Following the PayPal example from the Usenix presentation, let’s consider how availability can be measured based on HTTP request success rates. In their model, PayPal differentiates between different types of errors to clarify responsibility and pinpoint availability issues.
For instance, HTTP requests might return various error codes (e.g., 500 for server errors and 404 for missing pages). To calculate availability, they look at the system processes' total number of successful HTTP requests. Here’s how you might calculate it:
Imagine a system processed 100,000 requests in a day, of which 1,000 resulted in server-side errors (e.g., HTTP 500 error), and 500 were client-side issues (e.g., HTTP 400 error). The availability calculation would exclude failed interactions caused by incorrect client input but account for server-side failures:
In this example, PayPal ensures clear attribution of errors by distinguishing between client-side and server-side problems, allowing for more accurate calculations and better service reliability.
Graphing service operations over time can help identify availability trends and areas for improvement. While not a calculation method, graphing availability allows businesses to visualize periods of high or low availability, helping to understand patterns like increased downtime during peak usage or geographic-specific issues. These visualizations can support root cause analysis and proactive service improvements, though they don’t directly calculate availability.
By tracking availability through both server-side and client-side metrics, organizations can gain a holistic understanding of how well their systems are performing and where improvements are needed. Pairing these approaches with event-based calculations helps ensure accurate and meaningful measurements.
Source: Annual calculation of downtime
Calculating annual downtime is crucial for both long-term strategic planning and operational efficiency. For businesses relying on continuous system availability, understanding how downtime adds up over the year is essential for optimizing performance and identifying areas for improvement. Downtime can be calculated in two ways: through the traditional time-based approach and the request-based approach, both offering valuable insights for improving system reliability.
Annual downtime metrics allow businesses to anticipate the cumulative impact of small, isolated failures. This helps set realistic service-level agreements (SLAs), allocate resources for system improvements, and ensure that planned maintenance or unexpected failures don't significantly impact availability targets. For systems operating in mission-critical environments, annual downtime is a key indicator of how well the system supports business continuity.
In the time-based approach, downtime is measured based on how much time a system is unavailable within a given period, typically over a year. For instance, consider a system that experiences 27 five-minute downtime periods throughout the year. The total downtime can be calculated as follows:
Now, to have an annual availability calculation, we first determine the total time available in a year:
Finally, using the formula for availability:
While 135 minutes of downtime might seem insignificant in isolation, when accumulated over the year, it can noticeably reduce availability, impacting system performance and user experience.
In a request-based approach, downtime is measured by the percentage of failed requests over a defined period rather than when a system is down. This method is especially useful in distributed systems or cloud-based environments where users may experience different availability levels depending on their location or network conditions.
For request-based availability calculation, we use the following formula:
For example, imagine a system that processes 500 million requests annually. If 1 million requests fail due to server-side or client-side issues, the availability would be:
In this scenario, even a small percentage of failed requests could represent a significant number of customer interactions, emphasizing the need to address both server-side and client-side failures.
Whether using a time-based or request-based method, calculating downtime offers valuable insights into system reliability. By understanding patterns in downtime, businesses can:
Annual downtime metrics also help set availability benchmarks and evaluate the effectiveness of current strategies in improving uptime, allowing organizations to plan and mitigate potential failures.
Source: Outages: understanding the human factor
System downtime can lead to significant disruptions, affecting operational efficiency, customer satisfaction, and financial outcomes. Understanding the primary causes of downtime is essential for implementing preventive strategies that improve system availability. Based on insights from the Uptime Institute and other studies, the following are the key causes of system downtime:
Human error continues to significantly contribute to system downtime, accounting for nearly 40% of all major outages in recent years. These errors often arise from inadequate or ignored procedures, improper configurations, or mistakes during routine maintenance. According to the Uptime Institute's 2022 report, 85% of human-error-related incidents stem from employees failing to follow established protocols. Rigorous staff training and automation tools can mitigate such issues, reducing human intervention in sensitive tasks.
Hardware malfunctions, including server crashes, memory corruption, and storage device breakdowns, are prevalent in many IT environments. One of the leading hardware-related issues is a power failure, which accounts for 43% of significant data center outages, as reported by the Uptime Institute. Specifically, uninterruptible power supply (UPS) failures are a common cause. Redundant hardware systems and preventive maintenance are critical for minimizing downtime caused by equipment breakdowns.
As organizations increasingly adopt cloud technologies, software-defined architectures, and hybrid setups, the complexity of managing these environments has escalated. Networking-related issues are now the largest cause of IT downtime, contributing to many outages over the last three years. According to Uptime's research, software glitches and networking failures often result in system crashes, data loss, and extended recovery times.
External IT failures have become more frequent with the rising reliance on third-party cloud service providers. Uptime’s analysis shows that 63% of publicly reported outages since 2016 were caused by third-party operators such as cloud, hosting, or colocation services. In 2021 alone, these external providers were responsible for 70% of all significant outages, with prolonged recovery times becoming increasingly common.
The duration of outages has steadily increased, with nearly 30% of reported outages in 2021 lasting more than 24 hours—an alarming rise compared to just 8% in 2017. Complex recovery procedures, inadequate failover systems, and challenges in diagnosing the root causes of failures contribute to these extended downtimes.
Though less frequent, natural disasters and extreme weather conditions can cause catastrophic outages, particularly in data centers located in vulnerable areas. These factors are often beyond an organization’s control but require comprehensive disaster recovery planning and geographic redundancy to mitigate their impact.
Understanding the primary causes of downtime provides a clear path to implementing preventive measures. Solutions like staff training, process automation, redundant infrastructure, and effective disaster recovery strategies are essential for improving overall system availability and reducing the likelihood of costly outages.
Source: Availability in System Design
System availability can be measured differently depending on the scope, context, and specific operations involved. Understanding the types of system availability provides clarity for making accurate calculations and informed decisions regarding system reliability. Here are the key types:
Instantaneous availability, or point availability, represents the probability that a system will be operational at a particular moment. This metric is typically forward-looking, predicting the likelihood of the system functioning during a specific time window in the future, such as during critical operational periods or scheduled events. This type of availability is commonly used in sectors like defense, where systems need to be fully operational during a mission or deployment.
Average uptime availability refers to the percentage of time a system is available and functioning over a specific period, such as during a mission or operational phase. Unlike instantaneous availability, this is a backward-looking metric used to assess how well a system performed over a past period. It is beneficial for systems with regular scheduled maintenance or downtime.
Steady-state availability represents the long-term availability of a system after it has undergone an initial "learning phase" or operational instability. Over time, system performance stabilizes, and the steady-state availability value reflects the system’s asymptotic behavior—a point where the system’s availability reaches a near-constant level.
Inherent availability focuses on a system’s availability when only corrective maintenance is considered. This excludes external factors like logistics delays, preventive maintenance, and other operational inefficiencies. It provides a view of the system's baseline operational capacity under ideal conditions and is often used to measure a system's inherent design and operational performance.
Achieved availability takes a more comprehensive view, including both corrective and preventive maintenance in its calculation. When all maintenance activities are considered, a realistic estimate of how often the system is operational is provided. This metric is useful for organizations that balance regular maintenance with operational needs.
By understanding these different types of availability, businesses can choose the most relevant metrics to assess their systems’ performance based on their specific operational needs and challenges.
Source: Calculating IT Service Availability
Improving system availability requires a multi-faceted approach that addresses the most common causes of downtime, such as human error, hardware failures, and system design weaknesses. Businesses can significantly increase system uptime and reliability by focusing on these areas and implementing best practices. Here are key strategies:
Building systems with failure in mind is crucial to maintaining high availability. By anticipating potential failure points and integrating redundancy, failover mechanisms, and backup systems, you ensure your system can continue operating even when some components fail. This strategy is essential in distributed architectures and cloud environments.
It's vital to have scalable resources to handle unexpected demand surges. By automatically scaling up capacity during high-demand periods, systems can prevent bottlenecks and ensure availability. Cloud platforms like AWS, Azure, and GCP offer autoscaling features that can dynamically adjust the number of resources based on workload.
One of the most effective ways to improve availability is to identify risks actively. Conduct regular audits of system vulnerabilities and set up comprehensive monitoring systems to track potential points of failure. Real-time monitoring provides visibility into system performance, enabling teams to act on early warning signs before they escalate into full-blown outages.
Regular testing of system components and software updates is essential for maintaining availability. Automated testing tools can simulate workloads and stress-test systems to identify weaknesses.
Having well-defined procedures to diagnose and resolve issues quickly is essential for minimizing downtime. Create incident response protocols that outline steps to follow when a failure occurs. This includes identifying the root cause, notifying the relevant teams, and implementing a fix or workaround.
In software, preventive maintenance involves identifying and fixing bugs or inefficiencies before they impact availability. This strategy reduces unplanned downtime and ensures that systems remain reliable over time.
Human error is a significant cause of downtime, especially in complex IT environments. Autonomous systems can alleviate this by automating routine tasks, reducing manual intervention, and freeing engineers to focus on higher-level strategic issues. For example, platforms like Sedai.io leverage AI to automate system operations, ensuring optimal performance and cost optimization, which minimizes the chances of human-induced errors.
It is crucial to accurately measure availability and feed that data back to teams for continuous improvement. Tools that provide detailed service-level metrics allow organizations to pinpoint areas for improvement and hold teams accountable for maintaining high availability.
By employing these strategies, businesses can dramatically improve system availability and reliability, ensuring that systems remain functional even under stress. These methods address the core causes of downtime, including human error and hardware failures, while incorporating advanced technology to keep systems running efficiently.
Accurate measurement of system uptime vs downtime is essential for organizations relying on digital infrastructure. Understanding these metrics directly influences customer satisfaction, revenue, and operational efficiency. Businesses can enhance their system reliability and performance by examining factors like uptime and the various availability classifications.
AI-driven platforms like Sedai provide innovative solutions for proactively optimizing availability. Sedai’s advanced machine learning algorithms autonomously detect and resolve issues that could threaten uptime, reducing Failed Customer Interactions (FCIs) by up to 70%. With features like predictive autoscaling and Smart SLOs, Sedai ensures systems are prepared for traffic spikes while optimizing costs during quieter periods.
By implementing tools like Sedai and adopting best practices in availability management, businesses can improve operational resilience, avoid potential failures, and maintain reliable and scalable systems.
Book a demo today to see how Sedai can transform your system availability!
September 24, 2024
December 4, 2024
Outages are costly. More than half (54%) of the 2023 Uptime Institute data center survey respondents say their most recent significant, serious, or severe outage cost more than $100,000, with 16% saying that their most recent outage cost more than $1 million. With the rise of always-on, globally distributed systems, downtime can lead to substantial financial losses, reputational damage, and customer dissatisfaction. This is why businesses across industries—from cloud service providers to e-commerce platforms—prioritize maximizing uptime to ensure their systems remain operational as much as possible.
System availability measurement involves understanding uptime vs. downtime, which directly impacts a company’s ability to meet service-level agreements (SLAs) and customer expectations. Calculating availability allows organizations to assess accurately how often their systems are accessible to users. This calculation becomes crucial for identifying potential risks, optimizing system performance, and improving customer satisfaction in an era when even a few minutes of downtime can significantly impact a business's bottom line.
To stay competitive, businesses must have precise methods for tracking system uptime, pinpointing failures, and improving performance. By having an accurate system availability measurement, companies can avoid disruptions and enhance their infrastructure's reliability and efficiency.
Source: Availability
System availability refers to the probability that a system is fully operational and accessible when needed rather than simply during a set time frame. This metric emphasizes the time a system functions and whether it is available during critical operational periods. Availability is calculated as the percentage of time a system can perform its intended functions without undergoing failure or repair.
The system availability formula is typically expressed as:
However, this formula is not solely time-based; it also considers whether the system is operational when required. For example, if a system is only needed during specific production hours, availability should reflect its performance during those crucial periods, not simply over 24 hours.
A system’s availability heavily depends on the condition of its equipment. Functioning equipment is defined as components not undergoing repair or inspection, allowing them to perform their designated tasks. When equipment is down for maintenance, it directly impacts system uptime, making it crucial to maintain machinery proactively to avoid unexpected breakdowns.
A system must also operate under normal conditions to be fully available. This means that the equipment should run in an ideal environment at its expected rate without facing any external disruptions. Variability in environmental, operational, or process-based conditions can compromise the system’s ability to function optimally, affecting availability.
One key aspect of system availability is on-demand functioning. Systems are required to be operational when they are scheduled for production or service. Availability is less concerned with overall uptime and more focused on whether the system performs when needed. This distinction is critical because even highly available systems may only meet operational requirements if they function during scheduled production periods.
By taking a more holistic approach to measuring availability—considering both time-based and interaction-based methods—businesses can ensure that their systems are reliable when needed.
Source: Calculating total system availability
System availability can be calculated using two main approaches: the traditional time-based method and the event-based method. Each method provides valuable insights depending on the type of system being measured, whether it’s hardware, software, or a service-oriented infrastructure. Understanding both methods allows businesses to perform an availability calculation more comprehensively, ensuring systems are operational when needed.
The time-based method measures availability based on how long a system is operational relative to its downtime. The formula for this calculation is:
For example, a software system operates for 200 hours a month but experiences 10 hours of downtime due to maintenance and unexpected failures. The availability calculation would be:
This method is straightforward and commonly used for measuring availability in hardware systems, but it may only partially capture the complexities of modern software environments.
For software systems, availability must often be evaluated based on customer interactions or events rather than time alone. The event-based approach measures availability by calculating the percentage of successful interactions (e.g., API requests, database queries) from total interactions during a given period.
The formula for event-based availability is as follows:
For instance, if a cloud-based application processes 10,000 API requests in a given time frame and 100 of those requests fail, the availability calculation would be:
This method provides a more granular understanding of system performance, especially in distributed and cloud-based software systems, where downtime may only affect a subset of users or services.
In the software industry, high availability is often measured by how many "nines" are achieved, reflecting minimal downtime:
Achieving high availability, especially four or five nines, is considered world-class and often a benchmark for mission-critical systems like cloud platforms or financial services, where even minor disruptions can have major consequences.
Source: Is there a better way to measure system availability?
Measuring system availability is only sometimes straightforward, especially when dealing with complex distributed systems. While traditional tracking of uptime vs downtime provides useful insights, modern systems often have many moving parts, from multiple servers to diverse software components. Each piece can experience different levels of availability, making it difficult to achieve a comprehensive view.
One of the primary challenges in measuring availability across distributed systems is that these systems are composed of multiple interdependent components, each with its uptime and potential for failure. For example, a payment processing system like PayPal might consist of various services, including authentication, transaction processing, and fraud detection. Each service might have different levels of availability, and failure in one service can cause a cascade of failures across the entire system.
The complexity increases further when systems operate across multiple data centers or cloud regions, where factors like network latency, regional outages, and traffic loads must be considered. These systems can experience partial failures—where some services remain functional while others are degraded—making calculating an accurate availability percentage challenging.
Solution: One approach to managing availability in distributed systems is implementing redundant components and failover mechanisms. Redundancy helps ensure that if one component fails, another can take over its role, increasing overall system availability. For example, having backup servers or leveraging multi-cloud strategies can minimize the impact of regional failures.
Source: Understanding availability
Another key challenge is collecting availability metrics from both the server and client sides. From the infrastructure perspective, server-side metrics measure how well the system performs, such as how many requests are processed successfully by the servers. However, server-side data may not capture client-side issues, where users experience failed interactions due to network problems or geographic limitations, even if the servers are fully operational.
Businesses need to measure both perspectives for a complete picture of system availability. Client-side metrics can be gathered using canary deployments or synthetic monitoring, where test requests simulate real-user traffic to identify potential issues before they impact a broader audience. This provides insight into the user experience of availability, helping organizations catch problems that may not appear in server-side logs.
Solution: Combine server-side monitoring tools (e.g., AWS CloudWatch, Google Stackdriver) with client-side monitoring (e.g., canaries, real-user monitoring) to gain a holistic view of system health. This dual approach ensures that infrastructure and user experience are factored into an availability calculation.
Consider a payment processing system like PayPal, which has several interrelated services: authentication, transaction processing, and fraud detection. These services must be highly available to ensure smooth transactions, but they can fail independently. For example, the transaction processing service might be fully functional, while the authentication service experiences issues, preventing users from completing payments.
In this scenario, server-side monitoring might show high availability for transaction processing, but client-side metrics could reveal that users cannot complete transactions due to authentication failures. This discrepancy highlights the need for comprehensive monitoring across all services from server and client perspectives.
Solution: Organizations can implement Service Level Objectives (SLOs) for each component and track availability metrics for individual services. Businesses can proactively address issues before they affect the broader system by using service-level dashboards and integrating alerts when any part of the system fails to meet its SLOs.
Accurately measuring system availability is critical for maintaining operational efficiency and ensuring a seamless user experience. There are two primary methods for measuring system availability: server-side metrics, which focus on infrastructure and service health, and client-side metrics, which simulate customer interactions to assess the true availability from the user’s perspective. These methods work in tandem to provide a comprehensive view of a system’s availability.
Server-side metrics refer to data collected from the system’s infrastructure, such as application servers, databases, and network components. These metrics provide insights into the performance and health of the system's services. For example, server-side instrumentation can track successful API requests, server response times, and error codes.
However, more than server-side metrics are needed to give the complete picture, as they focus only on how well the backend services are operating. If a server runs smoothly but users cannot access it due to client-side issues like network latency, these problems will not be captured. Therefore, while server-side data is essential, it must be paired with client-side monitoring to assess availability comprehensively.
Client-side metrics simulate user interactions with the system, providing insight into the end-user experience. One method to gather these metrics is to use canary tests—small-scale, real-time simulations of customer traffic that evaluate availability based on how successfully requests are processed.
By simulating actual user conditions, client-side metrics can capture issues such as geographic service outages, latency from the user's perspective, or failed transactions due to client-side errors that server-side instrumentation might miss. For example, while the server might process a request successfully, high latency or connectivity issues can still cause client-side failures, which would only be detectable through these simulated traffic tests.
Following the PayPal example from the Usenix presentation, let’s consider how availability can be measured based on HTTP request success rates. In their model, PayPal differentiates between different types of errors to clarify responsibility and pinpoint availability issues.
For instance, HTTP requests might return various error codes (e.g., 500 for server errors and 404 for missing pages). To calculate availability, they look at the system processes' total number of successful HTTP requests. Here’s how you might calculate it:
Imagine a system processed 100,000 requests in a day, of which 1,000 resulted in server-side errors (e.g., HTTP 500 error), and 500 were client-side issues (e.g., HTTP 400 error). The availability calculation would exclude failed interactions caused by incorrect client input but account for server-side failures:
In this example, PayPal ensures clear attribution of errors by distinguishing between client-side and server-side problems, allowing for more accurate calculations and better service reliability.
Graphing service operations over time can help identify availability trends and areas for improvement. While not a calculation method, graphing availability allows businesses to visualize periods of high or low availability, helping to understand patterns like increased downtime during peak usage or geographic-specific issues. These visualizations can support root cause analysis and proactive service improvements, though they don’t directly calculate availability.
By tracking availability through both server-side and client-side metrics, organizations can gain a holistic understanding of how well their systems are performing and where improvements are needed. Pairing these approaches with event-based calculations helps ensure accurate and meaningful measurements.
Source: Annual calculation of downtime
Calculating annual downtime is crucial for both long-term strategic planning and operational efficiency. For businesses relying on continuous system availability, understanding how downtime adds up over the year is essential for optimizing performance and identifying areas for improvement. Downtime can be calculated in two ways: through the traditional time-based approach and the request-based approach, both offering valuable insights for improving system reliability.
Annual downtime metrics allow businesses to anticipate the cumulative impact of small, isolated failures. This helps set realistic service-level agreements (SLAs), allocate resources for system improvements, and ensure that planned maintenance or unexpected failures don't significantly impact availability targets. For systems operating in mission-critical environments, annual downtime is a key indicator of how well the system supports business continuity.
In the time-based approach, downtime is measured based on how much time a system is unavailable within a given period, typically over a year. For instance, consider a system that experiences 27 five-minute downtime periods throughout the year. The total downtime can be calculated as follows:
Now, to have an annual availability calculation, we first determine the total time available in a year:
Finally, using the formula for availability:
While 135 minutes of downtime might seem insignificant in isolation, when accumulated over the year, it can noticeably reduce availability, impacting system performance and user experience.
In a request-based approach, downtime is measured by the percentage of failed requests over a defined period rather than when a system is down. This method is especially useful in distributed systems or cloud-based environments where users may experience different availability levels depending on their location or network conditions.
For request-based availability calculation, we use the following formula:
For example, imagine a system that processes 500 million requests annually. If 1 million requests fail due to server-side or client-side issues, the availability would be:
In this scenario, even a small percentage of failed requests could represent a significant number of customer interactions, emphasizing the need to address both server-side and client-side failures.
Whether using a time-based or request-based method, calculating downtime offers valuable insights into system reliability. By understanding patterns in downtime, businesses can:
Annual downtime metrics also help set availability benchmarks and evaluate the effectiveness of current strategies in improving uptime, allowing organizations to plan and mitigate potential failures.
Source: Outages: understanding the human factor
System downtime can lead to significant disruptions, affecting operational efficiency, customer satisfaction, and financial outcomes. Understanding the primary causes of downtime is essential for implementing preventive strategies that improve system availability. Based on insights from the Uptime Institute and other studies, the following are the key causes of system downtime:
Human error continues to significantly contribute to system downtime, accounting for nearly 40% of all major outages in recent years. These errors often arise from inadequate or ignored procedures, improper configurations, or mistakes during routine maintenance. According to the Uptime Institute's 2022 report, 85% of human-error-related incidents stem from employees failing to follow established protocols. Rigorous staff training and automation tools can mitigate such issues, reducing human intervention in sensitive tasks.
Hardware malfunctions, including server crashes, memory corruption, and storage device breakdowns, are prevalent in many IT environments. One of the leading hardware-related issues is a power failure, which accounts for 43% of significant data center outages, as reported by the Uptime Institute. Specifically, uninterruptible power supply (UPS) failures are a common cause. Redundant hardware systems and preventive maintenance are critical for minimizing downtime caused by equipment breakdowns.
As organizations increasingly adopt cloud technologies, software-defined architectures, and hybrid setups, the complexity of managing these environments has escalated. Networking-related issues are now the largest cause of IT downtime, contributing to many outages over the last three years. According to Uptime's research, software glitches and networking failures often result in system crashes, data loss, and extended recovery times.
External IT failures have become more frequent with the rising reliance on third-party cloud service providers. Uptime’s analysis shows that 63% of publicly reported outages since 2016 were caused by third-party operators such as cloud, hosting, or colocation services. In 2021 alone, these external providers were responsible for 70% of all significant outages, with prolonged recovery times becoming increasingly common.
The duration of outages has steadily increased, with nearly 30% of reported outages in 2021 lasting more than 24 hours—an alarming rise compared to just 8% in 2017. Complex recovery procedures, inadequate failover systems, and challenges in diagnosing the root causes of failures contribute to these extended downtimes.
Though less frequent, natural disasters and extreme weather conditions can cause catastrophic outages, particularly in data centers located in vulnerable areas. These factors are often beyond an organization’s control but require comprehensive disaster recovery planning and geographic redundancy to mitigate their impact.
Understanding the primary causes of downtime provides a clear path to implementing preventive measures. Solutions like staff training, process automation, redundant infrastructure, and effective disaster recovery strategies are essential for improving overall system availability and reducing the likelihood of costly outages.
Source: Availability in System Design
System availability can be measured differently depending on the scope, context, and specific operations involved. Understanding the types of system availability provides clarity for making accurate calculations and informed decisions regarding system reliability. Here are the key types:
Instantaneous availability, or point availability, represents the probability that a system will be operational at a particular moment. This metric is typically forward-looking, predicting the likelihood of the system functioning during a specific time window in the future, such as during critical operational periods or scheduled events. This type of availability is commonly used in sectors like defense, where systems need to be fully operational during a mission or deployment.
Average uptime availability refers to the percentage of time a system is available and functioning over a specific period, such as during a mission or operational phase. Unlike instantaneous availability, this is a backward-looking metric used to assess how well a system performed over a past period. It is beneficial for systems with regular scheduled maintenance or downtime.
Steady-state availability represents the long-term availability of a system after it has undergone an initial "learning phase" or operational instability. Over time, system performance stabilizes, and the steady-state availability value reflects the system’s asymptotic behavior—a point where the system’s availability reaches a near-constant level.
Inherent availability focuses on a system’s availability when only corrective maintenance is considered. This excludes external factors like logistics delays, preventive maintenance, and other operational inefficiencies. It provides a view of the system's baseline operational capacity under ideal conditions and is often used to measure a system's inherent design and operational performance.
Achieved availability takes a more comprehensive view, including both corrective and preventive maintenance in its calculation. When all maintenance activities are considered, a realistic estimate of how often the system is operational is provided. This metric is useful for organizations that balance regular maintenance with operational needs.
By understanding these different types of availability, businesses can choose the most relevant metrics to assess their systems’ performance based on their specific operational needs and challenges.
Source: Calculating IT Service Availability
Improving system availability requires a multi-faceted approach that addresses the most common causes of downtime, such as human error, hardware failures, and system design weaknesses. Businesses can significantly increase system uptime and reliability by focusing on these areas and implementing best practices. Here are key strategies:
Building systems with failure in mind is crucial to maintaining high availability. By anticipating potential failure points and integrating redundancy, failover mechanisms, and backup systems, you ensure your system can continue operating even when some components fail. This strategy is essential in distributed architectures and cloud environments.
It's vital to have scalable resources to handle unexpected demand surges. By automatically scaling up capacity during high-demand periods, systems can prevent bottlenecks and ensure availability. Cloud platforms like AWS, Azure, and GCP offer autoscaling features that can dynamically adjust the number of resources based on workload.
One of the most effective ways to improve availability is to identify risks actively. Conduct regular audits of system vulnerabilities and set up comprehensive monitoring systems to track potential points of failure. Real-time monitoring provides visibility into system performance, enabling teams to act on early warning signs before they escalate into full-blown outages.
Regular testing of system components and software updates is essential for maintaining availability. Automated testing tools can simulate workloads and stress-test systems to identify weaknesses.
Having well-defined procedures to diagnose and resolve issues quickly is essential for minimizing downtime. Create incident response protocols that outline steps to follow when a failure occurs. This includes identifying the root cause, notifying the relevant teams, and implementing a fix or workaround.
In software, preventive maintenance involves identifying and fixing bugs or inefficiencies before they impact availability. This strategy reduces unplanned downtime and ensures that systems remain reliable over time.
Human error is a significant cause of downtime, especially in complex IT environments. Autonomous systems can alleviate this by automating routine tasks, reducing manual intervention, and freeing engineers to focus on higher-level strategic issues. For example, platforms like Sedai.io leverage AI to automate system operations, ensuring optimal performance and cost optimization, which minimizes the chances of human-induced errors.
It is crucial to accurately measure availability and feed that data back to teams for continuous improvement. Tools that provide detailed service-level metrics allow organizations to pinpoint areas for improvement and hold teams accountable for maintaining high availability.
By employing these strategies, businesses can dramatically improve system availability and reliability, ensuring that systems remain functional even under stress. These methods address the core causes of downtime, including human error and hardware failures, while incorporating advanced technology to keep systems running efficiently.
Accurate measurement of system uptime vs downtime is essential for organizations relying on digital infrastructure. Understanding these metrics directly influences customer satisfaction, revenue, and operational efficiency. Businesses can enhance their system reliability and performance by examining factors like uptime and the various availability classifications.
AI-driven platforms like Sedai provide innovative solutions for proactively optimizing availability. Sedai’s advanced machine learning algorithms autonomously detect and resolve issues that could threaten uptime, reducing Failed Customer Interactions (FCIs) by up to 70%. With features like predictive autoscaling and Smart SLOs, Sedai ensures systems are prepared for traffic spikes while optimizing costs during quieter periods.
By implementing tools like Sedai and adopting best practices in availability management, businesses can improve operational resilience, avoid potential failures, and maintain reliable and scalable systems.
Book a demo today to see how Sedai can transform your system availability!
.svg)
.svg)
