3 ms·

I guess I'll add context since I've been "well akschually'd". There was time planned for this in that we were updating MariaDB and we had estimated extra time

I guess I'll add context since I've been "well akschually'd". There was time planned for this in that we were updating MariaDB and we had estimated extra time for unforeseen problems.. The defaults changed to strict, I realized we had severe data integrity problems and as the senior developer on the team I made the decision to turn off strict mode in production and turn it on in QA and our dev environments so we can prioritize the integrity of the data. This is literally my job as a senior developer. If this is not what a senior developer is for in most companies, it goes back to what I said before about not being built for such environments. I made a judgement call here, and I'll continue to defend that judgement call as me doing my damned job. Maybe in your world data integrity sits behind the newest dropdown on the UI, but not in mine. But the thing is, everyone was ok with it until about a week later when this VP sent it down the line that I was to be reprimanded for "behavioral" problems because they mistook me asking questions as me not wanting to do the work. And I got reprimanded, and then the QA environment wasn't changed because this reprimand was insisted on by a VP, my direct manager was forced to do it, and then ignored it afterwards. I'd rather go back to working for myself than to deal with this shit. edit: as for why strict mode wasn't on before, this application was developed by an incompetent. To give an example of the level of skill that built this app. I once came across code the following (psuedocode): foreach(object) sql += generate_insert_statement(object). $parts = split("INSERT INTO", sql); foreach(part from parts): sql = "INSERT INTO" + part; do_query(sql) I've been tempted to send in submissions to the daily WTF on more than 1 occasion.

fiestaman 7y ago
Regardless of your reasons for your decision, responding to dissent by calling it a "well akschually” isn’t a good way to respond to dissent.
- celticmusic 7y ago
  this smacks of the "intolerance of intolerance is itself intolerance" arguments. My response to a bullshit power play is to use the mobility of my profession to remove myself from the situation. I will not continue to subject myself to such bullshit just for sake of appearing as if I'm accepting of "dissent". edit: and yes, I'm still angry about it. Which is part of the reason why I'm leaving. In 20+ years of development I've never experiences something like this, and I refuse to deal with it. And the entire thing about the DB is a red herring anyways, it was the asking of questions that pissed off a VP that started the entire mudslide.
harshalizee 7y ago
Your reply aptly explains why your peers aren't a fan of working with you. You sound like an a-hole. Even if you were the principal engineer of the entire org and made dumb, rash decisions like this, I'd tell you to go pound sand irrespective of your seniority and title. So you're 4 months in, you made a hasty prod change on a database with very little oversight. That tells me you're neither senior nor someone who can work well with others. I'm not saying having 'strict' turned off was a good idea, but nobody working at your firm wants to deal with some new unexpected behavior over the weekend caused by some over zealous dev who made some change because he/she believed they were right.
- celticmusic 7y ago
  It's obvious that something about this is personal for you. You're making specific claims here that directly contradict what I've stated. I'd list them out, but really I don't want to waste my time on someone who is obviously angry about something unrelated.
- flukus 7y ago
  Where are you getting the idea that this was a dumb rash decision? It sounds like they upgraded the database instance without proper QA in the first place and that this created a lot of issues. OP didn't specify if this was their decision or not, but even if it was there might be some good reasons for it and many of those reasons point to further organisation incompetence. The only rash decision OP made (from the information available) was to disable the feature in production to at least get the appearance of everything working, which was the status quo. This is shooting the messenger, the product was silently failing for god knows how long and your blaming the person that forced the organisation to acknowledge those failures and their own personal incompetence. And they did this in a way that only had an immediate impact on non-production systems. I get the impressions you can't work well with others, because it requires a good dose of humility and the ability to acknowledge problems. Sweeping those problems under the carpet to bite people in mysterious ways at odd times is someone that's difficult to work with.
  - celticmusic 7y ago

fiestaman 7y ago

Regardless of your reasons for your decision, responding to dissent by calling it a "well akschually” isn’t a good way to respond to dissent.

celticmusic 7y ago
this smacks of the "intolerance of intolerance is itself intolerance" arguments. My response to a bullshit power play is to use the mobility of my profession to remove myself from the situation. I will not continue to subject myself to such bullshit just for sake of appearing as if I'm accepting of "dissent". edit: and yes, I'm still angry about it. Which is part of the reason why I'm leaving. In 20+ years of development I've never experiences something like this, and I refuse to deal with it. And the entire thing about the DB is a red herring anyways, it was the asking of questions that pissed off a VP that started the entire mudslide.

harshalizee 7y ago

Your reply aptly explains why your peers aren't a fan of working with you. You sound like an a-hole. Even if you were the principal engineer of the entire org and made dumb, rash decisions like this, I'd tell you to go pound sand irrespective of your seniority and title. So you're 4 months in, you made a hasty prod change on a database with very little oversight. That tells me you're neither senior nor someone who can work well with others. I'm not saying having 'strict' turned off was a good idea, but nobody working at your firm wants to deal with some new unexpected behavior over the weekend caused by some over zealous dev who made some change because he/she believed they were right.

celticmusic 7y ago
It's obvious that something about this is personal for you. You're making specific claims here that directly contradict what I've stated. I'd list them out, but really I don't want to waste my time on someone who is obviously angry about something unrelated.
flukus 7y ago
Where are you getting the idea that this was a dumb rash decision? It sounds like they upgraded the database instance without proper QA in the first place and that this created a lot of issues. OP didn't specify if this was their decision or not, but even if it was there might be some good reasons for it and many of those reasons point to further organisation incompetence. The only rash decision OP made (from the information available) was to disable the feature in production to at least get the appearance of everything working, which was the status quo. This is shooting the messenger, the product was silently failing for god knows how long and your blaming the person that forced the organisation to acknowledge those failures and their own personal incompetence. And they did this in a way that only had an immediate impact on non-production systems. I get the impressions you can't work well with others, because it requires a good dose of humility and the ability to acknowledge problems. Sweeping those problems under the carpet to bite people in mysterious ways at odd times is someone that's difficult to work with.
- celticmusic 7y ago