The Hidden History of High Availability: How Systems Became Always On

Always On: Our Reflections on the History of High Availability

Setting the Stage

We often find ourselves taking “always-on” services for granted. Whether it’s checking an email at midnight or streaming a movie before bed, we rarely think about what happens behind the scenes to make these experiences seamless. Yet, it wasn’t always this way.

There was a time when even websites behaved like brick-and-mortar stores, complete with “hours of operation.” It sounds strange now, but the idea of 24/7 service wasn’t considered necessary. Computers were tools, not companions ready at any hour. The turning point came as the internet connected people across time zones. Suddenly, a midnight request in one country became someone else’s midday business transaction. That global demand forced engineers to rethink how computers stayed available—and eventually, how databases themselves adapted.

Create How-to Videos in Seconds with AI

Stop wasting time on repetitive explanations. Guidde’s AI creates stunning video guides in seconds—11x faster.

• Turn boring docs into visual masterpieces

• Save hours with AI-powered automation

• Share or embed your guide anywhere

How it works: Click capture on the browser extension, and Guidde auto-generates step-by-step video guides with visuals, voiceover, and a call to action.

Best part? It’s 100% free.

👉 Download the extension now

What strikes us most is how each generation of engineers solved the problems of their era, building layer by layer toward the systems we rely on today. What we now expect as “normal” is the result of decades of work, trial, and compromise.

Understanding Fault Tolerance vs. High Availability

Before diving into history, we like to draw a line between two terms that often get mixed together: fault tolerance and high availability.

• Fault tolerance means there is no interruption at all, even if something fails. Imagine a light bulb that instantly switches to a backup bulb the second the first one burns out—so seamlessly that no one notices the room ever went dark.

• High availability, on the other hand, means the system is designed to stay available most of the time, but there might be tiny hiccups or delays during failures.

Both matter, but they aren’t the same. In fact, one can exist without the other. A service could be “always reachable” but still misbehave behind the scenes if it isn’t truly fault tolerant. We’ve seen companies like Netflix experiment with tools such as Chaos Monkey, deliberately breaking parts of their system just to make sure it can survive gracefully. It’s a good reminder that resilience doesn’t come from hoping things never break—it comes from preparing for when they inevitably do.

Tip we’ve learned to appreciate: Even in our own projects, building redundancy isn’t about perfection; it’s about graceful recovery.

AI You’ll Actually Understand

Cut through the noise. The AI Report makes AI clear, practical, and useful—without needing a technical background.

Join 400,000+ professionals mastering AI in minutes a day.

Stay informed. Stay ahead.

No fluff—just results.

Smarter AI. Zero fluff.

Early Steps: Active-Passive Systems

The first step toward what we call high availability today was the Active-Passive model. Imagine one computer doing all the work (the active one), while another sat quietly on the sidelines, ready to take over if disaster struck. This setup worked, but it wasn’t without trade-offs.

Initially, replication between the active and passive machine was synchronous, meaning changes weren’t finalized until the backup confirmed them. The catch? If the backup went down, the whole system could stall—defeating the purpose. So engineers switched to asynchronous replication, which was more forgiving but carried its own risk: if the active machine failed before syncing, some data might be lost.

We see in this chapter of history both the brilliance and fragility of early designs. They solved one problem while introducing another. Still, this was progress. Businesses could start to imagine systems that didn’t collapse the moment a single machine failed.

Our takeaway here: Don’t underestimate simple redundancy. Even a basic backup strategy can save you when things go wrong.

Scaling Up: Sharding and Active-Active

As internet use exploded, the limits of single-machine systems became painfully clear. Demand for more capacity led to sharding—splitting data into chunks distributed across many machines. This improved throughput and reduced single points of failure. But with sharding came complexity: engineers had to manage which shard held what data, and changing the setup later was often a nightmare.

To ease some of this burden, Active-Active systems came into play. Here, multiple nodes could handle reads and writes, and data changes were shared between them. This improved availability dramatically—if one node failed, another could take its place.

Yet, this approach came with a cost: consistency. With multiple active nodes making changes simultaneously, conflicts were bound to happen. Systems had to rely on conflict resolution algorithms to smooth out differences, sometimes after the fact. While not perfect, this compromise was acceptable for many applications where uptime mattered more than absolute data accuracy in every millisecond.

We think of this stage as a balancing act. Businesses were willing to accept small anomalies in exchange for the promise that their systems wouldn’t blink offline.

Tip for anyone tackling scale: Know your priorities. Sometimes speed and availability win; other times, accuracy must come first. Clarity about which matters most makes decisions easier.

Top Publishers Hand-Selecting Amazon Brands to Promote this Holiday Season

This holiday season, top publishers are handpicking Amazon brands to feature in gift guides, newsletters, and reviews — driving high-intent shoppers straight to storefronts.

Levanta is connecting a select group of 7–9 figure brands with publishers ready to promote products to millions of buyers.

See if your brand qualifies

The Leap to Multi-Active and Beyond

The final chapter in this story so far is the arrival of Multi-Active systems. Unlike Active-Active, which only ensured availability after writes were committed, Multi-Active requires consensus before confirming anything. In practice, this means multiple nodes agree on changes at the same time, preserving both availability and consistency.

Google’s Spanner, for example, pioneered consensus-based replication at massive scale. It inspired newer systems like CockroachDB, which aimed to bring strong consistency and high availability without the exotic requirements of atomic clocks. These innovations opened doors for global deployments where downtime is virtually unnoticeable, even if an entire data center goes offline.

What impresses us here is the balance achieved. Multi-Active systems don’t chase availability at the expense of correctness. They acknowledge that data must be reliable if it’s to power the world’s critical services.

Our reflection looking forward: Each leap in high availability has been about trade-offs, but also about preparing for the next challenge. From single backups to global consensus, the journey has been one of constant adaptation. Who knows—maybe the future will see quantum entanglement replace even today’s most advanced replication techniques.

Until then, we’ll keep appreciating the invisible engineering that makes our digital world feel instant, constant, and always within reach.

What’s your next spark? A new platform engineering skill? A bold pitch? A team ready to rise? Share your ideas or challenges at Tiny Big Spark. Let’s build your pyramid—together.

That’s it!

Keep innovating and stay inspired!

If you think your colleagues and friends would find this content valuable, we’d love it if you shared our newsletter with them!

PROMO CONTENT

Can email newsletters make money?

With the world becoming increasingly digital, this question will be on the minds of millions of people looking for new income streams in 2025.

The answer is—Absolutely!

That’s it for this episode!

Thank you for taking the time to read today’s email! Your support allows me to send out this newsletter for free every day. 

 What do you think for today’s episode? Please provide your feedback in the poll below.

Share the newsletter with your friends and colleagues if you find it valuable.

Disclaimer: The "Tiny Big Spark" newsletter is for informational and educational purposes only, not a substitute for professional advice, including financial, legal, medical, or technical. We strive for accuracy but make no guarantees about the completeness or reliability of the information provided. Any reliance on this information is at your own risk. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not reflect any organization's official position. This newsletter may link to external sites we don't control; we do not endorse their content. We are not liable for any losses or damages from using this information.