Earlier quoted context omitted.
In reality it's all peachy until stuff doesn't work and no one knows why, or how to investigate an issue or remotely where to begin to troubleshoot it. Change and evolution is good, but I think there is still a lot to be said about knowing the basics to anything. Levels of abstractions eventually hurt more than it helps.
> Levels of abstractions eventually hurt more than it helps. This is just not true, otherwise everyone would need to know ASM or be able to easily contract someone who does.
The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
341–350 of 435 posts
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#342Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And yet tolerate it will, because it is somewhat impossible to hire a team composed entirely of people who are each experienced and competent in writing and designing frontends, writing and architecting backends, deploying and maintaining whatever backing services you've using, build and release engineering, Linux, networking, etc. You're right that everyone is not going to start out knowing everything. No matter h…
>The only real question is whether there are enough people capable of this out there. I think there would be if we set it up as a general expectation. That strikes me as merely wishful thinking. It's not as if there isn't already research on human cognitive abilities in general. Do you have any scientific basis for thinking engineers are merely being held back by our acceptance of specialization, rather than by inher…
One and two-man startups provide ample evidence that working knowledge of the whole platform is not beyond human cognitive scope, even if getting this to be accepted at large requires some extra cultural encouragement and support, and some professional management of individual "skewing".
Once more, it's not that everyone has to be a hardcore expert in everything all at once. You don't want them to be.
You just want your main people to know each platform component well enough to be able to make a reasoned decision about the trade-offs involved in using one or the other for a specific task, and then to be able to own that decision as a group.
If they can't or won't do that, the platform decisions become political instead of technical. I've seen this over and over again, where massive technical problems are routed around because the Java developers have been told they can't touch Ruby, or the C# developers have been told they can't touch SQL, and the real problem never gets fixed, because we only recognize naive, scared "specialists" who insist that they can't learn Python because they're just a PHP developer, so they can't look at that piece of Python that's holding up the thing, instead of rounded, capable "generalists" who can be trusted to call in help when they're getting in over their heads, and may take an occasional "inspection" or two to make sure they're aligned with best practices.
General contractors are not electricians, but they can do a lot of routine work that involves electrical fixtures, sockets, and outlets. You call the electrician for the face-melting stuff.
General practitioner MDs are not dermatologists, but they can do a lot of work that involves routine skin disorders. They'll prescribe creams for fungal infections, rashes, acne, etc. They'll let you know you need to call in a dermatologist for the "skin-melting" stuff.
In software, we don't say "call the DBA for the database-melting stuff." We say "the DBA will write all of the SQL for you." It just doesn't seem to comport to me.
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#343I think the only reasonable answer is "it depends". After the new updated base OS images for our systems after Meltdown and Spectre were out, it literally took us ten minutes of human and about an hour of machine time to recompile all of our containers, run the tests and deploy them to production on our Kubernetes cluster, replacing the old insecure ones. At the scale of our systems, any grumpy sysadmin would have sp…
> At the scale of our systems, any grumpy sysadmin would have spent at least several days untangling the dependencies and carefully restarting all servers in the correct order after some manually `sudo apt-get`ing (and probably forgetting a few of the lesser used systems). if you are operating at suchs a large scale, your sysadmin should be automating things (not necesserly with docker mind you). This automation has…
As for any "tangle" of dependencies that may exist, I've never seen that be caused by any choice made by "Ops" but, rather, solely by those writing the appllication code being deployed. As such, it would apply just as much to a Docker image as to (what I view as) a traditional deployment.
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#344> And since nobody is still able to compile things from scratch, everybody just downloads precompiled binaries from random websites. Often without any authentication or signature. Apache has official mirrors that host repo files for various package managers so you can install using apt-get or whatever it is that replaced yum (dnf? dnf): https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/bigtop/bigtop-1.2.1/re... So precompiled bi…
I think the author's point was this: "Unless you compile it yourself, you can't trust it."
Unless one can compile it oneself, how can one trust that a particular version of a binary release correspond to a particular version of a source release?
If the process is reproduced by another trusted-enough source and is identical to the official release, then I'd say one can go ahead and trust the binary release of either one.
Sadly, I don't think this is generally done, though perhaps ones own spot-checking of the official release is enough.
That's supposed to be the basis of modern science, too, though, of course, it's not generally done there, either.
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like ansible with vagrant as well - it makes for a nice clean way of deploying to development environments while also been nicely 'self' documenting and not limiting (you can drop back to shell), it's a lovely tool for the most part. Edit: The thing I really like about Ansible is how unsexy it is, it's just a nice sane way of doing largely what you could do yourself with ssh and bash but in a language that doesn't…
It would be even nicer if people weren't advocating it as a configuration management system, only as what it is: a deployment system.
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#346I think the entire statosphere of DevOps is just about dead on the whole in 2018 .. in retro, after working with things like Docker .. and more specific industry variations beyond the Amazon tech, it makes no sense to dwell on the security / control of a dedicated systems admin professional since the tools are all outside the local domain anyway. The rest from VoIP to IoT to container services are managed whole-sale…
It's just that they don't want to. They think it's boring, or perhaps even beneath them. It's a bit like tax preparation.
I don't think that's really changed all that much, even today, even if it's now programming against the AWS API, judging by the number of job postings for such a role.
Also, like with tax preparation, using a good expert instead of doing it oneself could save on a lot of money and/or future headaches, but it can come with "grumpy" old-fashioned-seeming nagging about procedures akin to annotating and saving receipts. Whether it's worth it depends on situation and, far more importantly temperament.
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#347Isn't this just an example of automation? Other than sunk cost, by what argument is it reasonable that the sysadmin job should in any way deserve to be protected or aught to continue to be a thing? To my ears containers sounds like they've kind of solved the problem.
With that in mind, I don't see sysadmins going anywhere soon. Every layer of abstraction is supposed to 'eliminate sysadmins', but inevitably it becomes yet another system that someone needs to audit and maintain.
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The only real question is whether there are enough people capable of this out there. I think there would be if we set it up as a general expectation. That strikes me as merely wishful thinking. It's not as if there isn't already research on human cognitive abilities in general. Do you have any scientific basis for thinking engineers are merely being held back by our acceptance of specialization, rather than by inher…
Once the downvotes start coming in, people read comments uncharitably, and the thread gets lost, but to be clear, I'm not advocating for anything that is beyond the cognitive capacity of typical software developers. One and two-man startups provide ample evidence that working knowledge of the whole platform is not beyond human cognitive scope, even if getting this to be accepted at large requires some extra cultural…
However, I still disagree with your premise that it's merely our attitude at large somehow holding people back. Startup founders don't refute my suggestion that there's a cognitive limitation involved, since they're relatively rare and may well have greater capacity to be the generalists that you're proposing. I'm also not convinced that, even among founders, they're as broad generalists as you're suggesting.
You go on to give non-computer examples of generalists and specialists, yet you don't address how it is that specialists are (admittedly only imoplicitly) ok there but not in computer tech.
To reiterate my point about cognitive capacity, if true specialists are desirable, then I allege asking them to be more of a generalist makes them a less competent specialist and therefore less valuable on the market. That's an alternate explanation for extremity of specialization than preconceived notions.
Now, personally, I share your desire for greater breadth of knowledge among all technical professionals, if for no other reason than they might have a greater appreciation for my own specialization. I just don't think it's realistic.
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
> shackles placed upon them by sysadmins Well, potentially unpopular opinion here, but an awful lot of sysadmins brought their looming obsolesence on themselves. I'm an app (as in "a program that runs on a computer", not an iOS add-on) developer, always have been. I get requirements from the business types, code it up in vi or Eclipse or whatever, get it working, and then they (the business) want to deploy the workin…
Actually, as a sysadmin, I sympathize with you, since I consider that kind of situation to be a sign of, essentially, bad system administration. It also sounds like it might be at a larger company. Personally, I've always considered it a significant part of my job to make developers' jobs easier, especially with something like deployments and dependencies. As such, I disagree that we've brought our own "obsolesence"…
Re: The sad state of sysadmin in the age of containers (2015)
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe you are talking about Ansible tower, the paid tool from RedHat that gives a centralized server. Ansible is not centralized. It configures servers with SSH and can operate from any user or host who has ssh access.
Yeah but when you run a playbook it's running from a single machine which is calling out via SSH
Ultimately you could have a git clone for every machine and only ever run it against localhost.