3 ms·
Automated Failure Testing
- wyldfire 11y agoI love failure testing, this is a great article. Molly looks pretty interesting. Netflix is remarkably bold for enabling their failure tests in production. Shameless plug for libfaultinj [1], a fault injection library. It's remarkably simple (and still not quite as feature-rich as I'd like). You can use it in a unit-testing context to make sure you do something sane for things like file-not-found, disk-full, or extraordinary-delay-on-open. Or you can use it in a larger-scale integration style testing with random likelihood of failures popping up. https://github.com/androm3da/libfaultinj https://github.com/androm3da/libfaultinj
- exelius 11y ago> Netflix is remarkably bold for enabling their failure tests in production. This is almost a best practice these days, isn't it? I mean, once your reliability engineering teams are mature enough from a visibility and tooling standpoint to be able to identify and prevent issues. Of course, this all assumes a relatively robust architecture from the get-go...
- markild 11y agoMaybe a bit off topic, but I couldn't find any info on the origin of the name "Molly". Am I guessing correctly that it has something to do with this[1] anecdote? [1]: http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/M/molly-guard.html http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/M/molly-guard.html
- DiabloD3 11y agoThat's what I immediately thought of as well. Presumably, Molly (Netflix's tool) is the kid that goes around and switches everything off. As in, it intentionally causes the problems Molly Guards protect from.