4 ms·
The change was to add a new index and then remove the old one. It's something that would have passed review. The cause was a defect in the tooling. The reque
by jewel 11y ago
The change was to add a new index and then remove the old one. It's something that would have passed review.
The cause was a defect in the tooling. The requests weren't tied together in the way they were displayed and so the DBA removed the old index first.
- protomyth 11y agoThat's not a tooling defect, that's a process and personal knowledge of the system defect. No DBA should remove an index without knowing what is replacing it or that code got deployed to make it obsolete. Checking if that index is currently being used would be a minimum. If a DBA cannot stop a deploy you have process problems.
- mst 11y agoThe post mortem specifically noted that it looked unused, presumably because the code in master now claimed to depend on the new index.
- protomyth 11y agoI do not mean by looking at the source code. I mean by looking at the production database that you are about to remove an index from. This is a financial institution, and I am really struggling with this post mortem to understand how they do not have more ceremony around production changes. Checks and balances are important.