4 ms·
It is good that they are testing, but the mindset that this is a special occasion seems very weird to me. Rule #1 of programming is that if you didn't test it,
by jblow 12y ago
It is good that they are testing, but the mindset that this is a special occasion seems very weird to me.
Rule #1 of programming is that if you didn't test it, it doesn't work. (It may still not work for real after you test it, but at least it's got something.)
You can't claim to anyone, or even yourself, that you have some kind of fault-tolerant system if you don't do this kind of test after every change.
- sokoloff 12y agoWe only started doing this about 3 years ago after I heard John Allspaw speak at Velocity. It has cut down dramatically the "Oh, that system that we thought was redundant was only redundant in the sense of an appendix, not in the sense of kidneys..." It was initially a hard sell to my ops team to implement it. (I promised them air cover for any losses we incurred as a result of game-day testing, of course.) I agree with you that it should be common, but I'd suspect an honest survey of the field would show that it's far from standard practice. I'd guess fewer than 25% of companies do this in any meaningful way.