Stories with Tag Incident Management

• Take this on-call rotation and shove it

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-03-27 21:09:28

  Verbose tl;dr

  The author argues against the common practice of on-call rotations, particularly as implemented by many tech companies. They contend that being constantly tethered to work, even when "off," is detrimental to employee well-being and ultimately unproductive. Instead of reactive on-call systems interrupting rest and personal time, the author advocates for a proactive approach: building more robust and resilient systems that minimize failures, investing in thorough automated testing and observability, and fostering a culture of shared responsibility for system health. This shift, they believe, would lead to a healthier, more sustainable work environment and ultimately higher quality software.

  In a provocative blog post entitled "Take this on-call rotation and shove it," author Scott Mitelli articulates a profound dissatisfaction with the contemporary practice of on-call rotations, particularly as they are implemented within the software development industry. He posits that the current system, frequently touted as a shared responsibility amongst team members, is, in reality, a deleterious imposition that significantly degrades the quality of life for engineers. He argues that the constant anticipation of potential disruptions, the intrusive nature of alerts, and the requirement to be perpetually available negatively impact mental well-being, disrupt personal time, and ultimately lead to engineer burnout.

  Mitelli meticulously deconstructs the purported benefits of on-call rotations, challenging the notion that they foster a sense of ownership and shared understanding of the system. He suggests that the pressure and anxiety associated with being on-call often overshadow any potential learning opportunities, and that the fear of making mistakes under pressure can stifle experimentation and innovation. He further contends that the disruption to sleep patterns, family life, and leisure activities engendered by on-call duties creates a chronic state of stress that is unsustainable in the long term.

  The author proceeds to explore alternative approaches to managing system reliability and incident response. He advocates for a more proactive approach that prioritizes building robust and resilient systems from the outset, thereby minimizing the need for constant intervention. He also suggests investing in comprehensive automated monitoring and alerting systems that can effectively filter noise and escalate issues only when genuinely necessary. Furthermore, he champions the concept of dedicated site reliability engineering (SRE) teams as a more specialized and sustainable solution for managing complex systems, arguing that these specialized teams can develop the expertise and dedicated focus necessary to handle incidents effectively without imposing the burden on the entire development team.

  In essence, Mitelli's central argument is that the current on-call rotation model is a flawed and outdated practice that should be replaced by more thoughtful and sustainable approaches to system reliability and incident management. He concludes with a call to action, urging companies and engineers to critically evaluate the impact of on-call rotations and to explore alternative models that prioritize the well-being and professional development of their engineering teams. He paints a picture of a future where engineers can focus on building innovative and reliable systems without the constant dread of being summoned to address production issues at any given moment.

  • on-call
  • on-call rotation
  • on-call fatigue
  • burnout
  • stress
  • developer burnout
  • software engineering
  • work-life balance
  • pager duty
  • alert fatigue
  • Incident Management
  • DevOps
  • SRE
  • site reliability engineering
  • system administration
  • tech culture
  • Work Culture

  Summary of Comments ( 19 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43498213

  Verbose tl;dr

  Hacker News users largely agreed with the author's sentiment about the burden of on-call rotations, particularly poorly implemented ones. Several commenters shared their own horror stories of disruptive and stressful on-call experiences, emphasizing the importance of adequate compensation, proper tooling, and a respectful culture around on-call duties. Some suggested alternative approaches like follow-the-sun models or no on-call at all, advocating for better engineering practices to minimize outages. A few pushed back slightly, noting that some level of on-call is unavoidable in certain industries and that the author's situation seemed particularly egregious. The most compelling comments highlighted the negative impact poorly managed on-call has on mental health and work-life balance, with some arguing it can be a major factor in burnout and attrition.

  The Hacker News post titled "Take this on-call rotation and shove it" generated a moderate number of comments discussing various aspects of on-call work and the author's perspective. Several commenters generally agreed with the author's frustrations regarding poorly implemented on-call rotations, particularly the lack of proper compensation and the disruption to personal life.

  One compelling comment thread focused on the distinction between being "on-call" and effectively working a second shift. Commenters argued that true on-call work should be compensated appropriately for the inconvenience and disruption, even if no incidents occur. However, if the on-call duty consistently requires active work and prevents personal time, it should be treated as regular work hours and compensated accordingly. This discussion highlighted the importance of clearly defined expectations and fair compensation for on-call responsibilities.

  Several users shared their own experiences with dysfunctional on-call rotations, echoing the author's sentiments about the negative impact on well-being and work-life balance. These anecdotes served to validate the author's claims and illustrate the prevalence of this issue in the tech industry.

  Another point of discussion revolved around the importance of building resilient systems that minimize the need for constant on-call intervention. Commenters suggested that prioritizing proactive measures, such as thorough testing, robust monitoring, and automated remediation, can significantly reduce the burden on on-call engineers. This preventative approach was presented as a more sustainable solution compared to relying on reactive responses to frequent incidents.

  Some comments also touched upon the cultural aspect of on-call work, emphasizing the need for companies to foster a supportive environment that recognizes and values the contributions of on-call engineers. Suggestions included providing adequate training, clear escalation paths, and mechanisms for feedback and improvement.

  While there wasn't overwhelming agreement with every point made by the author, many comments reflected a shared understanding of the challenges associated with on-call work and the need for better practices within the industry. The discussion overall provided valuable insights into the complexities of managing on-call rotations effectively and ensuring the well-being of engineers.

• War Rooms vs. Deep Investigations

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-02-23 12:01:56

  Verbose tl;dr

  The post contrasts "war rooms," reactive, high-pressure environments focused on immediate problem-solving during outages, with "deep investigations," proactive, methodical explorations aimed at understanding the root causes of incidents and preventing recurrence. While war rooms are necessary for rapid response and mitigation, their intense focus on the present often hinders genuine learning. Deep investigations, though requiring more time and resources, ultimately offer greater long-term value by identifying systemic weaknesses and enabling preventative measures, leading to more stable and resilient systems. The author argues for a balanced approach, acknowledging the critical role of war rooms but emphasizing the crucial importance of dedicating sufficient attention and resources to post-incident deep investigations.

  Rachel Kroll's blog post, "War Rooms vs. Deep Investigations," delves into the contrasting approaches to troubleshooting complex technical issues, drawing a parallel between the frenetic energy of a "war room" and the more methodical, deliberate nature of a "deep investigation." Kroll argues that while the war room model, characterized by its intense, real-time collaboration and focus on rapid resolution, might appear superficially appealing, it often proves less effective than a thorough, patient investigation when dealing with intricate, deeply-rooted problems.

  The war room scenario, as depicted by Kroll, involves assembling a large group of individuals, often representing diverse teams and areas of expertise, into a physical or virtual space. This assembly operates under significant pressure to swiftly identify and rectify the issue at hand, frequently driven by high-visibility outages or critical business disruptions. This urgency, while understandable, can foster an environment prone to hasty decisions, overlooked details, and a tendency to prioritize immediate fixes over addressing the underlying causes. The emphasis on rapid action can also inadvertently stifle individual thought and critical analysis as the group gravitates towards a perceived consensus, potentially missing crucial insights that might emerge from a more solitary, reflective approach.

  In contrast, Kroll champions the "deep investigation" methodology, which emphasizes a more measured, analytical process. This approach prioritizes a comprehensive understanding of the system and its intricacies, often involving extensive data gathering, meticulous log analysis, and rigorous testing. It encourages individual exploration and independent thought, allowing engineers to delve into specific aspects of the problem without the pressure of a large group dynamic. While this method may require more time and resources upfront, Kroll posits that it ultimately leads to more robust and sustainable solutions by addressing the root cause of the problem rather than merely patching its symptoms. This, she argues, not only prevents recurrence but also enhances overall system resilience and understanding.

  Furthermore, Kroll highlights the potential for war rooms to exacerbate existing communication challenges and amplify stress levels. The high-pressure environment can hinder effective communication and collaboration, leading to misunderstandings and misdirected efforts. Conversely, the focused, individual work favored by deep investigations allows for clearer thinking and more precise communication when collaboration is eventually required.

  In essence, Kroll advocates for a shift in mindset from reactive firefighting to proactive problem-solving. She suggests that while the allure of the war room's rapid response is undeniable, the long-term benefits of a deep investigation, with its focus on understanding and addressing the underlying issues, far outweigh the perceived advantages of swift, but often superficial, fixes.

  • Incident Management
  • Incident Response
  • crisis management
  • Problem Solving
  • Debugging
  • Troubleshooting
  • Root Cause Analysis
  • postmortem analysis
  • software engineering
  • DevOps
  • SRE
  • systems thinking
  • Complex Systems
  • pressure
  • stress
  • cognitive bias
  • decision making
  • information overload

  Summary of Comments ( 41 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43148683

  Verbose tl;dr

  HN commenters largely agree with the author's premise that "war rooms" for incident response are often ineffective, preferring deep investigations and addressing underlying systemic issues. Several shared personal anecdotes reinforcing the futility of war rooms and the value of blameless postmortems. Some questioned the author's characterization of Google's approach, suggesting their postmortems are deep investigations. Others debated the definition of "war room" and its potential utility in specific, limited scenarios like DDoS attacks where rapid coordination is crucial. A few commenters highlighted the importance of leadership buy-in for effective post-incident analysis and the difficulty of shifting organizational culture away from blame. The contrast between "firefighting" and "fire prevention" through proper engineering practices was also a recurring theme.

  The Hacker News post "War Rooms vs. Deep Investigations" (linking to Rachel Kroll's blog post about incident response) generated a lively discussion with several compelling comments.

  Many commenters focused on the distinction between "war rooms" and deep investigations, echoing and expanding on Kroll's points. Some argued that war rooms, while potentially useful for quick coordination and communication during critical incidents, can hinder proper investigation and root cause analysis due to their focus on immediate remediation. They emphasized the importance of dedicated, post-incident investigations free from the pressure of ongoing outages. One commenter likened war rooms to treating symptoms while deep investigations aim to cure the underlying disease.

  Several people shared their personal experiences, offering concrete examples of both successful and unsuccessful incident response strategies. One recounted a situation where a war room devolved into a blame-fest, hindering progress. Another described the benefits of a hybrid approach, using a war room for initial triage and coordination, followed by a dedicated investigation team working independently.

  The discussion also touched upon the role of blame in incident response. Many commenters agreed that blame should be avoided during the initial response phase, focusing instead on restoring service. However, they acknowledged the importance of accountability in post-incident reviews, not to punish individuals, but to learn from mistakes and improve future processes.

  Several comments highlighted the crucial role of documentation and postmortems. They stressed the need for clear, concise reports that capture not only the technical details of the incident but also the decision-making process and communication flow.

  Some commenters discussed the psychological impact of major incidents on engineers and the importance of creating a supportive environment. One suggested providing engineers with dedicated time and resources for recovery after a stressful incident.

  Finally, the discussion explored the relationship between incident response and organizational culture. Some argued that a blame-free culture is essential for effective incident response, encouraging open communication and collaboration. They suggested that organizations should view incidents as opportunities for learning and improvement rather than occasions for punishment.

• The Canva outage: another tale of saturation and resilience

  permalink

  Posted: 2025-01-12 20:18:43

  Verbose tl;dr

  The Canva outage highlighted the challenges of scaling a popular service during peak demand. The surge in holiday season traffic overwhelmed Canva's systems, leading to widespread disruptions and emphasizing the difficulty of accurately predicting and preparing for such spikes. While Canva quickly implemented mitigation strategies and restored service, the incident underscored the importance of robust infrastructure, resilient architecture, and effective communication during outages, especially for services heavily relied upon by businesses and individuals. The event serves as another reminder of the constant balancing act between managing explosive growth and maintaining reliable service.

  The recent Canva outage serves as a potent illustration of the intricate interplay between system saturation, resilience, and the inherent challenges of operating at a massive scale, particularly within the realm of cloud-based services. The author meticulously dissects the incident, elucidating how a confluence of factors, most notably an unprecedented surge in user activity coupled with pre-existing vulnerabilities within Canva's infrastructure, precipitated a cascading failure that rendered the platform largely inaccessible for a significant duration.

  The narrative underscores the inherent limitations of even the most robustly engineered systems when confronted with extreme loads. While Canva had demonstrably invested in resilient architecture, incorporating mechanisms such as redundancy and auto-scaling, the sheer magnitude of the demand overwhelmed these safeguards. The author postulates that the saturation point was likely reached due to a combination of organic growth in user base and potentially a viral trend or specific event that triggered a concentrated spike in usage, pushing the system beyond its operational capacity. This highlights a crucial aspect of system design: anticipating and mitigating not just average loads, but also extreme, unpredictable peaks in demand.

  The blog post further delves into the complexities of diagnosing and resolving such large-scale outages. The author emphasizes the difficulty in pinpointing the root cause amidst the intricate web of interconnected services and the pressure to restore functionality as swiftly as possible. The opaque nature of cloud provider infrastructure can further exacerbate this challenge, limiting the visibility and control that service operators like Canva have over the underlying hardware and software layers. The post speculates that the outage might have originated within a specific service or component, possibly related to storage or database operations, which then propagated throughout the system, demonstrating the ripple effect of failures in distributed architectures.

  Finally, the author extrapolates from this specific incident to broader considerations regarding the increasing reliance on cloud services and the imperative for robust resilience strategies. The Canva outage serves as a cautionary tale, reminding us that even the most seemingly dependable online platforms are susceptible to disruptions. The author advocates for a more proactive approach to resilience, emphasizing the importance of thorough load testing, meticulous capacity planning, and the development of sophisticated monitoring and alerting systems that can detect and respond to anomalies before they escalate into full-blown outages. The post concludes with a call for greater transparency and communication from service providers during such incidents, acknowledging the impact these disruptions have on users and the need for clear, timely updates throughout the resolution process.

  • Canva
  • Outage
  • Saturation
  • Resilience
  • software reliability
  • Service Disruption
  • System Design
  • scalability
  • Cloud Computing
  • web application
  • Downtime
  • Business Continuity
  • Incident Management
  • High Availability
  • fault tolerance
  • Disaster Recovery
  • performance
  • Availability
  • SaaS
  • Design Tools

  Summary of Comments ( 39 )
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42676529

  Verbose tl;dr

  Several commenters on Hacker News discussed the Canva outage, focusing on the complexities of distributed systems. Some highlighted the challenges of debugging such systems, particularly when saturation and cascading failures are involved. The discussion touched upon the difficulty of predicting and mitigating these types of outages, even with robust testing. Some questioned Canva's architectural choices, suggesting potential improvements like rate limiting and circuit breakers, while others emphasized the inherent unpredictability of large-scale systems and the inevitability of occasional failures. There was also debate about the trade-offs between performance and resilience, and the difficulty of achieving both simultaneously. A few users shared their personal experiences with similar outages in other systems, reinforcing the widespread nature of these challenges.

  The Hacker News post discussing the Canva outage and relating it to saturation and resilience has generated several comments, offering diverse perspectives on the incident.

  Several commenters focused on the technical aspects of the outage. One user questioned the blog post's claim of "saturation," suggesting the term might be misused and that "overload" would be more accurate. They pointed out that saturation typically refers to a circuit element reaching its maximum output, while the Canva situation seemed more like an overloaded system unable to handle the request volume. Another commenter highlighted the importance of proper load testing and capacity planning, emphasizing the need to design systems that can handle peak loads and unexpected surges in traffic, especially for services like Canva with a large user base. They suggested that comprehensive load testing is crucial for identifying and addressing potential bottlenecks before they impact users.

  Another thread of discussion revolved around the user impact of the outage. One commenter expressed frustration with Canva's lack of an offline mode, particularly for users who rely on the platform for time-sensitive projects. They argued that critical tools should offer some level of offline functionality to mitigate the impact of outages. This sentiment was echoed by another user who emphasized the disruption such outages can cause to professional workflows.

  The topic of resilience and redundancy also garnered attention. One commenter questioned whether Canva's architecture included sufficient redundancy to handle failures gracefully. They highlighted the importance of designing systems that can continue operating, even with degraded performance, in the event of component failures. Another user discussed the trade-offs between resilience and cost, noting that implementing robust redundancy measures can be expensive and complex. They suggested that companies need to carefully balance the cost of these measures against the potential impact of outages.

  Finally, some commenters focused on the communication aspect of the incident. One user praised Canva for its relatively transparent communication during the outage, noting that they provided regular updates on the situation. They contrasted this with other companies that are less forthcoming during outages. Another user suggested that while communication is important, the primary focus should be on preventing outages in the first place.

  In summary, the comments on the Hacker News post offer a mix of technical analysis, user perspectives, and discussions on resilience and communication, reflecting the multifaceted nature of the Canva outage and its implications.