Block world problem concept in prolog12/15/2023 We turn things on there and if they haven’t caught on fire we feel a lot better about flipping it on for user facing traffic. Parts of that run book can be run as often as you like if you stop before the steps that alter production state, so you can run it a few times to take the median time and see if you’ve improved or regressed. We have one service that is particularly good for this because it doesn’t see a lot of traffic on average, but it bursts up to production requests levels during a certain workflow that is less time sensitive than live traffic but still gets scrutiny because it blocks a run book until it’s done. I’ve been moving our tools and sidecars and lesser services to do more reuse, not for the code and effort duplication reasons, but so these technologies get more burnin time before they have to do it live. If you have one main app or service constellation, then you can’t make any big changes like these because they have to scale from test benchtop to production with few steps in between and there’s just no accurate way to know what you’re going to see until you try. It's just better if you can keep people where they have existing expertise, and spend your learning points on solving problems users care about. It wasn't that people couldn't learn the language they could, we had lang PhDs. Nothing about it required a niche language technically, so the added difficulty of working around that was friction and risk. My view is a simple one as one of the leads responsible for it, it was a special case bit of code, something people tried to avoid touching. Maybe it would've needed to be rewritten anyway. ![]() Maybe it wouldn't have been made or would've been worse or more expensive if they'd been forced to write it in a supported language. Maybe this is a success story: someone made a useful tool in a weird language and we used it successfully for at least a year. It being a niche lang/community, it moved fast, so after a year or so our tool was apparently using deprecated practices in our supported languages, teams did large-scale fixup across repos for new versions, but this being a special lang/toolchain, it was on us.Įventually, I believe it got rewritten, somewhat simpler, in one of our supported languages, and it was fine. ![]() It being in a language most people didn't know well meant it mostly only got updated as necessary we certainly had people who could read the code and make tweaks with some comfort, but it was mostly just tweaks because nobody had the depth to really engage with the high level design idioms. The author was really smart, the code was good.įirst off, different build setup, different runtime, couldn't use most of our standard libs, so it was an island. I've been on teams responsible for components written in more niche, powerful languages by previous employees who were deep in that particular language community.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |