5 ms·

> Rolling out fixes fast, even if they require intensive changes, is completely reasonable and expected in many industries though. This is a financial trading

> Rolling out fixes fast, even if they require intensive changes, is completely reasonable and expected in many industries though. This is a financial trading platform. Do you understand the risks of potentially introducing a different bug?

manigandham 7y ago
I understand the risks need to be weighed against restoring service for their users who might be losing money and avoiding regulatory fines. Changing a single line can introduce a different bug. Use proper QA and testing to catch as many as possible as with any development. My emphasis is on getting things fixed quickly. They need to do whatever it takes to get systems online asap. Not sure what's so controversial about that.
- blackflame7000 7y ago
  Because move fast and break things doesn't work in finance.
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Nobody said that. Things are already broken. Move fast and fix things is what they need to do.
    - blackflame7000 7y ago
      Well to be honest we don't know how badly things are broken only they do. But the concept of moving fast while doing things perfectly is the holy grail of software development and not as easily achieved as you seem to make it appear.
      - manigandham 7y ago
        I only said it needed to be done fast, regardless of how much work. Of course it's not easy. I'm surprised by all the misinterpretation in this thread. Seems like it reflects the laid-back West Coast/SV attitude that isn't a good fit for high pressure time-sensitive work in other industries.
        blackflame7000 7y ago
        > needed to be done fast, regardless of how much work This is the part you don't understand. There is a difference between digging ten one-foot deep holes vs one ten-foot deep hole. People need time to plan how to coordinate and then get on the same page so that everyone can work at their own pace. That is the part that is not parallelizable and is the rate-determining step.
        manigandham 7y ago
        The context is all lost here. Plenty of other companies and industries have emergency action and disaster recovery. People don't work at their own pace, they work to the deadline with solid procedures. They can fix and replace entire components to restore service ASAP since because that's the priority. If this sounds unfamiliar or onerous then it's because you and others might have never experienced teams that do this. Robinhood is clearly lacking this experience and disaster planning.
        yibg 7y ago
        You seem to think (or at least imply) that hard things can be done fast if only you work hard enough at it, that it's just a matter of trying. This is just not true. Not sure how else your posts should be interpreted. I've spent days with a team (yes a competent team) just tracking down a bug, let alone fix it (although usually when it's tracked down it's relatively quick to fix). If this issue involves multiple systems in a highly complex environment, then it very well could take a while to address fully, no matter how hard they work at it.
        manigandham 7y ago
        Because that's usually the case. Crunch time, disaster recovery, and emergency fixes are common in every sector from video games to aerospace. If you can't fix then switch to a secondary, or rebuild from backup, or throttle users, or process manually, or do anything other than be completely down. RH wasn't prepared with any contingency. They should have a resolution for their users - even if they can't find or fix the original cause. That's the failure I'm talking about. See the 2 other users in this thread that describe similar high-pressure situations.
sporkland 7y ago
While I don't agree with OP about replacing an entire system overnight. I do remember a friend who worked on a trading floor, and when they had bugs, their manager would say "the traders are taking a 30 minute lunch, you have that long to fix it" with the clear implication that they'd be fired if they didn't. So I'm not sure if I know that the state of the art for trading platforms is as rock solid as everyone is implying, and Robinhood seems to be way far off from whatever gold standards there are, see infinite leverage bug. So I don't think it's crazy that they move quickly to fix it. I'd never be able to stomach the pressure, and I wouldn't wish it on others, but it doesn't seem crazy.

manigandham 7y ago

I understand the risks need to be weighed against restoring service for their users who might be losing money and avoiding regulatory fines. Changing a single line can introduce a different bug. Use proper QA and testing to catch as many as possible as with any development. My emphasis is on getting things fixed quickly. They need to do whatever it takes to get systems online asap. Not sure what's so controversial about that.

blackflame7000 7y ago
Because move fast and break things doesn't work in finance.
- manigandham 7y ago
  Nobody said that. Things are already broken. Move fast and fix things is what they need to do.
  - blackflame7000 7y ago
    Well to be honest we don't know how badly things are broken only they do. But the concept of moving fast while doing things perfectly is the holy grail of software development and not as easily achieved as you seem to make it appear.
    - manigandham 7y ago
      I only said it needed to be done fast, regardless of how much work. Of course it's not easy. I'm surprised by all the misinterpretation in this thread. Seems like it reflects the laid-back West Coast/SV attitude that isn't a good fit for high pressure time-sensitive work in other industries.
      - blackflame7000 7y ago
        > needed to be done fast, regardless of how much work This is the part you don't understand. There is a difference between digging ten one-foot deep holes vs one ten-foot deep hole. People need time to plan how to coordinate and then get on the same page so that everyone can work at their own pace. That is the part that is not parallelizable and is the rate-determining step.
        manigandham 7y ago
        The context is all lost here. Plenty of other companies and industries have emergency action and disaster recovery. People don't work at their own pace, they work to the deadline with solid procedures. They can fix and replace entire components to restore service ASAP since because that's the priority. If this sounds unfamiliar or onerous then it's because you and others might have never experienced teams that do this. Robinhood is clearly lacking this experience and disaster planning.
      - yibg 7y ago
        You seem to think (or at least imply) that hard things can be done fast if only you work hard enough at it, that it's just a matter of trying. This is just not true. Not sure how else your posts should be interpreted. I've spent days with a team (yes a competent team) just tracking down a bug, let alone fix it (although usually when it's tracked down it's relatively quick to fix). If this issue involves multiple systems in a highly complex environment, then it very well could take a while to address fully, no matter how hard they work at it.
        manigandham 7y ago
        Because that's usually the case. Crunch time, disaster recovery, and emergency fixes are common in every sector from video games to aerospace. If you can't fix then switch to a secondary, or rebuild from backup, or throttle users, or process manually, or do anything other than be completely down. RH wasn't prepared with any contingency. They should have a resolution for their users - even if they can't find or fix the original cause. That's the failure I'm talking about. See the 2 other users in this thread that describe similar high-pressure situations.

sporkland 7y ago

While I don't agree with OP about replacing an entire system overnight. I do remember a friend who worked on a trading floor, and when they had bugs, their manager would say "the traders are taking a 30 minute lunch, you have that long to fix it" with the clear implication that they'd be fired if they didn't. So I'm not sure if I know that the state of the art for trading platforms is as rock solid as everyone is implying, and Robinhood seems to be way far off from whatever gold standards there are, see infinite leverage bug. So I don't think it's crazy that they move quickly to fix it. I'd never be able to stomach the pressure, and I wouldn't wish it on others, but it doesn't seem crazy.