Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

thenewstack.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 74 posts

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#51

Post by pards »

ngc248 wrote: post #10
chgs wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, agile is simply People over process Results over bluster Flexibility over rigidity

Management just slaps agile onto everything nowadays. No time given for coming up with better solution, reducing tech debt. Most companies devolving into feature factories now. I call this methodology FRAGILE®

WaterScrumFall™

Funding process, requirements, planning: Waterfall

Development: Scrum

Manual testing, change approval boards, release management: Waterfall

Waterfall on the outside, scrum in the middle

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#52

Post by digitalnomd »

What I’ve found is that pure “DevOps” roles have become a way for recruiters to sell people on being the ops person without them realizing it.

I once worked at a place that hired me in as a software dev working in DevOps and the position quickly became consumed by the on-call workload.

The system we were managing constantly had fires that needed to be put out but we could never fix the underlying problems because someone needed to answer the page which often times was a false alarm.

So we’d quickly slap on band-aids to band-aids and management gave lip service to fixing the underlying problems with on-call. And the job became about reading the Jenkins build logs because the “devs” thought that was our job. They even forgot how to build and test their own software locally in some cases…

Needless to say I left pretty quickly and it made me not want to do a pure DevOps job again.

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#53

Post by InvaderFizz »

darkwater wrote: post #42
InvaderFizz wrote: post #16

The point about multiple deployments per day is well taken. Even those of us who wish to get there, have to contend with decades of process to make headway. In my F500, we have a regular release cadence of every two weeks. We would like that to be daily or more, but we are probably one to two years of maturity away from making that a reality. Not that we do DevOps in the way it was envisioned. We have a "DevOps" team…

So, looks like you have the right people. Why are you 2 years away from reaching one deploy per day? PS consider that the people that sells you the "we deploy N times per hour" consider, rightly so, feature flag activation as a deploy

We're still in the process of automating the promotion process. We're very conservative. We have dev, qa, stg, uat, and prod. All fully duplicated and IaC 100% after dev.

The "app" we deploy every two weeks is three major components made up of multiple microservices each, across eight dev teams.

And yeah, feature flags is under evaluation right now.

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#54

Post by satyrnein »

mkl95 wrote: post #29

Adopting a DevOps culture is usually very difficult at sales-driven orgs, most of which fallaciously call themselves product-driven orgs. Mostly because PMs see it as a cost rather than an investment, and their sole goal is for devs to ship an incremental ball of crap. The only times I've seen DevOps succeed was when it was supported by very senior engineers who were allowed to ignore product people's antics and impl…

Indeed the culture you describe does not sound healthy! In theory, Engineering does not report to Product, it is a partner with an important perspective, and can negotiate prioritizing certain projects without subterfuge.

In low trust environments, all engineering-led projects that Product/"the business" don't understand are assumed to be low value. Sometimes this is unfair, but sometimes it is warranted. Poor engineering leadership will green light all sorts of counterproductive "silver bullet" projects.

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#55

Post by datavirtue »

mkl95 wrote: post #29

Adopting a DevOps culture is usually very difficult at sales-driven orgs, most of which fallaciously call themselves product-driven orgs. Mostly because PMs see it as a cost rather than an investment, and their sole goal is for devs to ship an incremental ball of crap. The only times I've seen DevOps succeed was when it was supported by very senior engineers who were allowed to ignore product people's antics and impl…

Winner!

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#57

Post by datavirtue »

OJFord wrote: post #28
chgs wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, agile is simply People over process Results over bluster Flexibility over rigidity

Which is painfully ironic, because as soon as somewhere starts 'doing agile' it's all about the (scrum) process, bluster abounds, and everything is in pretty rigid sprints, scope changes to be avoided, etc.

And there is still a contract wrecking nearly everything, including the business relationship.

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#58

Post by frabbit »

Ekaros wrote: post #19
ibash wrote: post #5

Performance in the report is defined by how fast you can make a change to production, and how fast you can restore service. That’s fine I guess. What’s not taken into account is the time wasted on incidental complexity with devops tools. For example a highly competent engineer I know is burning hours trying to get ssl working on k8s/gcp with a specific configuration. Conceptually ssl is all straightforward, but there…

And when you choose badly the cloud platform that looked good at start. But later becomes complete pain... Always finding new amazing ways to break things... (looking at you Azure Container Instances) In the end for some light work loads could have been just thrown on VMs already running for other reasons. And it would have saved lot of time and effort... And it could have still be deployed with some level of devops.…

What would you use instead of ACI?

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#59

Post by Ekaros »

frabbit wrote: post #58
Ekaros wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And when you choose badly the cloud platform that looked good at start. But later becomes complete pain... Always finding new amazing ways to break things... (looking at you Azure Container Instances) In the end for some light work loads could have been just thrown on VMs already running for other reasons. And it would have saved lot of time and effort... And it could have still be deployed with some level of devops.…

What would you use instead of ACI?

Not sure, in this case of workload with very low load a VM I think...

Re: DevOps Isn't Dead, but It's Not in Great Health Either

#60

Post by jiggawatts »

eddythompson80 wrote: post #46
jiggawatts wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why even use SFTP? Just have them upload blobs to S3 or Azure Storage. The security is better and both are serverless solutions that cost basically nothing at normal scale. I seriously don’t understand why people in 2024 insist in reproducing these core services but badly and at great expense. PS: Azure Storage is multi-protocol and supports SFTP! https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/storage/blobs/secure...

You're simply missing the point. > I seriously don’t understand why people in 2024 insist in reproducing these core services but badly and at great expense. Because those users have a flow that they like and don't want to change it regardless of all the pitfalls in that flow. "It works, there is just this one problem. Why don't you invent a solution for this one problem for us. I don't want to use S3, or Azure or wha…

> Because users have a flow that they like

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx82407j1v3o

Some of these solutions were never good, but build a momentum of “we’ve always done it this way”.

Post reply on HN