4 ms·

I think most even semi-experienced developers know this. But doing the right thing is against their career grow goals so they overcomplicate the architecture on

I think most even semi-experienced developers know this. But doing the right thing is against their career grow goals so they overcomplicate the architecture on purpose.

collyw 3y ago
This industry is way too much of a fashion show. And too many devs are consumers of new technology in a similar way. After 20 years I am actually getting a bit skeptical behind the "you should constantly be learning" mantra. If you are constantly learning new, tech, you will never be an expert in anything. (That statement is very much a generalization and I am sure there are tons of people that will point out issues with it).
- justincredible 3y ago
  [dead]
The_Colonel 3y ago
> I think most even semi-experienced developers know this. I've met plenty of pretty senior people believing the opposite and most of them likely aren't good liars.
wharvle 3y ago
You also often have to fight for the right thing, then any problems that do happen are your fault. When the dumbshit over engineered "cloud architecture" that was pushed on you (managers don't get promoted or switch companies for a big raise by reducing their headcount... no, they get promoted by building a big team for a successful [please don't check in on how it was doing two years later...] "cloud transformation") has all kinds of problems and the costs shoot into the stratosphere, while five servers on a rack would have granted greater uptime and performance in practice for your usage patterns, and lower costs... it's not your fault. Have some bad luck and that simple solution you pushed for happens to experience an unlikely failure causing a significant outage in year 1, and your head's on the chopping block.
- pi-e-sigma 3y ago
  What I experienced is that it doesn't matter if I pushed for the right thing or inherited some overcomplicated shit. In case of any problems it's always my fault anyway. You just can't win.
  - bob1029 3y ago
    If you want the latitude to affect meaningful change, then you are also going to have to accept all ownership surrounding that thing and likely far beyond. I know it gets some flak (for good reason), but concepts like extreme ownership are fundamentally how I am able to tolerate this "everything is my fault" experience. If everything will be my fault in the end, then screw it - I will go ahead and take ownership/control of all of those things and make sure they don't come back around to bite me in the ass. If someone questions my authority, I always cast it in terms of "how many weekends with your family are you willing to sacrifice to support that idea?" Oftentimes this is all it takes to get those idle suggestions put in the bin so we can move forward. Solving database circus in a real business environment requires disengaging all of the safeties and getting very messy with your free time, stress levels and other humans. It's a front-loaded suffering though. If you actually know what you are doing and get through the schema refactor (and it sticks), everything is down-hill from that point. Getting one schema to rule them all and then having the team learn that schema == new common language by which you can communicate that did not exist prior. In our business, non-developers are just as aware of our tables, columns and relations as developers & DBAs are. In some cases, they have more detail about how a field is used than I do.
    - pi-e-sigma 3y ago
      I wish it would work in practice like that. Because in reality you can't just start making unapproved changes unless you really want to get fired quickly. But you can't get approval either. But you are 'responsible' for keeping it up and running, too.
      - nathants 3y ago
fullstackchris 3y ago
> doing the right thing is against their career growth goals only if the people who are hiring you are just as ignorant

I think most even semi-experienced developers know this. But doing the right thing is against their career grow goals so they overcomplicate the architecture on purpose.

collyw 3y ago

This industry is way too much of a fashion show. And too many devs are consumers of new technology in a similar way. After 20 years I am actually getting a bit skeptical behind the "you should constantly be learning" mantra. If you are constantly learning new, tech, you will never be an expert in anything. (That statement is very much a generalization and I am sure there are tons of people that will point out issues with it).

justincredible 3y ago
[dead]

The_Colonel 3y ago

> I think most even semi-experienced developers know this. I've met plenty of pretty senior people believing the opposite and most of them likely aren't good liars.

wharvle 3y ago

You also often have to fight for the right thing, then any problems that do happen are your fault. When the dumbshit over engineered "cloud architecture" that was pushed on you (managers don't get promoted or switch companies for a big raise by reducing their headcount... no, they get promoted by building a big team for a successful [please don't check in on how it was doing two years later...] "cloud transformation") has all kinds of problems and the costs shoot into the stratosphere, while five servers on a rack would have granted greater uptime and performance in practice for your usage patterns, and lower costs... it's not your fault. Have some bad luck and that simple solution you pushed for happens to experience an unlikely failure causing a significant outage in year 1, and your head's on the chopping block.

pi-e-sigma 3y ago
What I experienced is that it doesn't matter if I pushed for the right thing or inherited some overcomplicated shit. In case of any problems it's always my fault anyway. You just can't win.
- bob1029 3y ago
  If you want the latitude to affect meaningful change, then you are also going to have to accept all ownership surrounding that thing and likely far beyond. I know it gets some flak (for good reason), but concepts like extreme ownership are fundamentally how I am able to tolerate this "everything is my fault" experience. If everything will be my fault in the end, then screw it - I will go ahead and take ownership/control of all of those things and make sure they don't come back around to bite me in the ass. If someone questions my authority, I always cast it in terms of "how many weekends with your family are you willing to sacrifice to support that idea?" Oftentimes this is all it takes to get those idle suggestions put in the bin so we can move forward. Solving database circus in a real business environment requires disengaging all of the safeties and getting very messy with your free time, stress levels and other humans. It's a front-loaded suffering though. If you actually know what you are doing and get through the schema refactor (and it sticks), everything is down-hill from that point. Getting one schema to rule them all and then having the team learn that schema == new common language by which you can communicate that did not exist prior. In our business, non-developers are just as aware of our tables, columns and relations as developers & DBAs are. In some cases, they have more detail about how a field is used than I do.
  - pi-e-sigma 3y ago
    I wish it would work in practice like that. Because in reality you can't just start making unapproved changes unless you really want to get fired quickly. But you can't get approval either. But you are 'responsible' for keeping it up and running, too.
    - nathants 3y ago

fullstackchris 3y ago

> doing the right thing is against their career growth goals only if the people who are hiring you are just as ignorant