I guess it's different types of concerns. My feeling is that Google tries to optimize the resources of a datacenter, and the larger it is, the better things can scale. GCP Zones provide logical separation of machines for management (and network). There may be physical separation, but within a given region, GCP does not advertise this.
I think Google designs their datacenters for their own needs and expect you (a product running in their DCs) to distribute by region. Almost products at Google will be operating in multiple regions given the reach of most of our services, so DC design followed that need.
Based on GCP's docs, they still think region separate is better. Not sure why you wouldn't just do that?
If there is a catastrophic event (a large tornado hit AWS us-east-2), those buildings are pretty close to one another and both likely would be taken out, right? So you could lose multiple AZs since they are physically located so close to one another?
I think Google designs their datacenters for their own needs and expect you (a product running in their DCs) to distribute by region. Almost products at Google will be operating in multiple regions given the reach of most of our services, so DC design followed that need.
Based on GCP's docs, they still think region separate is better. Not sure why you wouldn't just do that?
If there is a catastrophic event (a large tornado hit AWS us-east-2), those buildings are pretty close to one another and both likely would be taken out, right? So you could lose multiple AZs since they are physically located so close to one another?