12 ms·
You have a serious engineering problem if you're not able to find the source of a crash after years.
by Thaxll 1mo ago
You have a serious engineering problem if you're not able to find the source of a crash after years.
- enraged_camel 1mo agoYou are either seriously naive, or have never worked on any large and complex legacy codebase.
- DaiPlusPlus 1mo agoI’ve been living in a bubble with my .NET day-job, where debugging/tracing/postmortems are a breeze. Compare with, say, a CORBA or DCOM system, deployed to prod with uber-optimized binaries without any debugging-symbols. So it’s not that I haven’t worked on large-scale, complex legacy systems - but that I haven’t worked on any large-scale, complex legacy systems written in languages bereft of runtime reflection and verbose error reporting. ————— It’s also possible that the bug was never found because its impact was so minimal: e.g. 1 crash per year, each causing 3 minutes’ downtime in a noncritical system: that’s something that will never get investigated fully.
- Thaxll 29d agoSorry but I don't buy it, any crash can be found and fix by one or more humans, if it was not it's either they're incompetent ( I doubt that ) or they did not beleive it was important enough to fix. A crash is actually the easiest kind of problem to fix since you have a crash. It means stacktrace, core dump, kernel error etc..
- brokencode 1mo agoIf it’s rare and the impact is low, then it’s not getting prioritized. It doesn’t matter how much time passes if you decide not to spend time investigating.