12 ms·
You're not in a great situation, but there are still lessons from the post. For example, you could break upgrades into a series of changes that can be individua
by jefftk 7y ago
You're not in a great situation, but there are still lessons from the post. For example, you could break upgrades into a series of changes that can be individually rolled back, and run smoke tests in between each one.
But your biggest reliability improvement would come from getting this system moved to continuous deployment without downtime. Now you can make one change at a time and roll back if it doesn't work.
- aeorgnoieang 7y agoIf they're in anything like the last situation I was in that seems similar, continuous deployment may not be possible – not technically, but with respect to other considerations, e.g. management or even the business's finances. There's still a lot of small software companies maintaining, and selling, on-premises installations of systems that use, e.g. Microsoft Access as a front-end client. Even then, continuous deployment is possible, and all-else-equal, a huge improvement for the developers and support staff, but also something that lots of management or owners may be (reasonably) averse to committing to implementing.