3 ms·
It's a detailed postmortem published within a couple hours of the incident and this blog post is disappointed that it didn't provide a comprehensive assessment
by tptacek 1y ago
It's a detailed postmortem published within a couple hours of the incident and this blog post is disappointed that it didn't provide a comprehensive assessment of all the procedural changes inside the engineering organization that came as a consequence. At the point in time when this blog post was written, it would not have been possible for them to answer these questions.
- otterley 1y ago"But I need attention now!"
- kqr 1y agoPart of my argument in the article is that it does't take long to come to that realisation if using the right methods. It would absolutely have been possible to identify the problem of missing feedback by that time.
- tptacek 1y agoIt absolutely does take long with the right methods; in fact, the righter the methods, the longer it takes. You're talking about a postmortem that was up within single digit hours of the initial incident resolution. A lot of orgs would wait on the postmortem just to be sure the system is settling back into a steady state! You were way off here.
- kqr 1y agoTo be clear, I'm not expecting a full analysis within hours. I'm hoping for a method of analysis by which the major deficiencies come up at a high level, and then as more effort is spent on it, more details around those deficiencies are revealed. What otherwise tends to happen, in my experience, is the initial effort brings up some deficiencies which are only partially the major ones, and subsequent effort is spent looking mainly in that same area, never uncovering those major deficiencies which were not initially discovered.