4 ms·
I mean if you own 3 independent businesses, each of which would be worth over $100 billion, and you break all of them simultaneously for an entire day, includin
by spoonjim 5y ago
I mean if you own 3 independent businesses, each of which would be worth over $100 billion, and you break all of them simultaneously for an entire day, including your internal email and your badge entry systems, yes, that is definitionally an anti-pattern.
- wmf 5y agoOne of the usual justifications for acquisitions is to save money using common infrastructure. Instagram and WhatsApp haven't been independent for a while.
- tshaddox 5y agoSurely “anti-pattern” doesn’t just mean “anything with negative outcomes.” Couldn’t this just be a really big mistake that isn’t indicative of an anti-pattern?
- spoonjim 5y agoSingle point of failure is the oldest anti-pattern in the book. Goes back 5000 years.
- tshaddox 5y agoIs there evidence to suggest that redundancy could have solved this problem? If this was simply a bad configuration that was propagated (as intended) to a large number of systems, I would hardly call that a single point of failure.
- withinboredom 5y agoIf it was a single change, deployed once that caused this, then it’s a single point of failure.
- greiskul 5y agoYeah, I don't think redundancy would have prevented this. What could prevent this is stuff like canaries. Or automatic rollbacks for this kind of change, with the change having to be submitted in two steps, one where it is applied, and one where it is manually confirmed that the change worked (or automatically by a system outside the network). If no confirmation is given after a certain time, the system should revert to the old configuration. Of course, we can't really know for sure until/if they release exactly what caused this issue.