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

A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

blog.navapbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 93 posts

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#81

Post by toomuchtodo »

tptacek wrote: post #79
toomuchtodo wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well won't that be a surprise when they see their premiums with a partner and children. I know I was certainly surprised to find I went from paying $300/month for myself to $1300/month for a family.

I think they're going to be a lot more surprised when they let their insurance lapse for a few months and find out that the ACA amendments provide guaranteed issue only if you've had continuous coverage --- without continuous coverage, you can be uninsurable without first working a full-time job for a year. Not "expensive to insure". Uninsurable, at any cost.

You can skip coverage for up to 3 months a year ("Short Gap" exemption). If you do this at the end of a year, you can get back in Jan 1st of the next year without penalty. You could, depending on risk level, only be insured 9 months each year to save on costs.

https://marketplace.cms.gov/technical-assistance-resources/e...

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#82

Post by notyourwork »

Thaxll wrote: post #51
notyourwork wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, it is good they can support it. However, is 8k TPS really a big deal? The team I work with handles 1M TPS.

You know 1M select(1)/sec is easy, now 1000req/sec with complex process is not easy. The number of requests per seconds doesn't matter, what matters is the complexity of the logic behind the request.

I like that you are assuming the complexity of 1M TPS without any context what so ever.

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#83

Post by Thaxll »

notyourwork wrote: post #82
Thaxll wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know 1M select(1)/sec is easy, now 1000req/sec with complex process is not easy. The number of requests per seconds doesn't matter, what matters is the complexity of the logic behind the request.

I like that you are assuming the complexity of 1M TPS without any context what so ever.

Yes 1M req/sec must but pretty simple, the only time I've seen those numbers were definitely not like "login calls", let me guess advertisement?

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#84

Post by rebootthesystem »

guelo wrote: post #25
rebootthesystem wrote: post #20

I am sure my wife will be very happy to learn about this test. It will definitely make up for our insurance going from about $12K per year to $26K per year. That, along with keeping our doctor and saving $2,500 per year have been fantastic. News Flash: Engineers think technology while, in the real world, the problem has nothing whatsoever to do with it. It's like tuning your Ferrarri for more power while your reality…

The goal of technology is to be so flawless that it dissapears into the background of our lives. When healthcare.gov was crashing the technology was extremely important and it made all the news and became a political controversy. Now that the technology is fine people like you can finger wag engineers and tell them that their work is unimportant.

You missed my point. I am an engineer. When I was younger I, too, wasted lots of time optimizing the irrelevant. Didn't fix a thing.

The ACA/Obamacare doesn't have a healthcare.gov traffic problem, it has a "it's a piece of shit" problem.

Of course, this is not the purview of engineers working on healthcare.gov. The point there is that we all get excited about building monuments to technology while completely forgetting the problem that had to be solved in the first place.

Someone will invariably say something like "20 million people have insurance now that they didn't have before!" or some other fabricated number. Let me address that now.

First. The President of the United States of America promised ME and my family that we could keep our plan, our doctor and, on top of that, we would save $2,500 a year. No need for a link, it's all over YouTube. He made that promise dozens of times.

I don't care of one or a hundred million people got insurance. The POTUS made a promise to families. If someone in business made such a promise and then reality was exactly opposite, in an unbelievably grotesque way, the smallest lawsuit for breach of contract and fraud would have them curl-up into a fetal position and cry.

Oh, yeah, and the rich part is that they stick the IRS on us. You know, the Gestapo-like, most-feared, we-can-ruin-your-fucking-life agency in the US now has hooks into your healthcare. And this is OK, how?

The POTUS lied to all of us. Period. The fact that there are people with insurance now is irrelevant. My family is playing the equivalent of a home mortgage for health insurance. How could anyone even remotely tolerate this from our elected officials.

Now, to address the "insured".

Most of these people have been shoved into Medicaid. The magic pill that solves it all, right?

I am not going to go into a long explanation. ACH/Obamacare represents the largest theft of personal property in the history of this nation. Why? Here, go learn something:

https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/eligibility/estate-recover...

Short version: These "insured" have signed over their personal assets to the government. All care they receive --by law-- requires reimbursement and the government is REQUIRED by law to recover costs.

Wonderful, isn't it? So many people now have insurance! So many people who have no clue the government just sunk their hooks into their estate. What a country!

I don't particularly like Trump but I hope he shreds Obamacare to little pieces, it is nothing less than the largest criminal act ever perpetrated on the American people.

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#85

Post by rebootthesystem »

honkhonkpants wrote: post #41
rebootthesystem wrote: post #20

I am sure my wife will be very happy to learn about this test. It will definitely make up for our insurance going from about $12K per year to $26K per year. That, along with keeping our doctor and saving $2,500 per year have been fantastic. News Flash: Engineers think technology while, in the real world, the problem has nothing whatsoever to do with it. It's like tuning your Ferrarri for more power while your reality…

What did your premiums look like before? In my case I just didn't have insurance because there was no functioning market anywhere that would sell you a family health care plan including childbirth, at any price. Now I get health insurance from my employer which isn't affected by ACA so I don't know what the market looks like.

We were paying about $650 per month and a $4,000 annual deductible.

Obamacare forced our insurer to cancel our plan.

First lie: "If you like your plan you can keep it".

The new plan was $1,450 per month and a $9,000 annual deductible.

Second lie: "A family will save $2,500 per year".

Even at that, we lost many of the doctors.

Third lie: "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor".

There's more in the details (co-pays, etc.). The above would be enough to throw any business person in jail for fraud. Yet we somehow tolerate and rationalize our elected officials behaving this way.

I don't particularly like Trump but if anyone is wondering why he got elected, well, start by understanding the true depths of Obamacare and go from there.

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#86

Post by tptacek »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #81
tptacek wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're going to be a lot more surprised when they let their insurance lapse for a few months and find out that the ACA amendments provide guaranteed issue only if you've had continuous coverage --- without continuous coverage, you can be uninsurable without first working a full-time job for a year. Not "expensive to insure". Uninsurable, at any cost.

You can skip coverage for up to 3 months a year ("Short Gap" exemption). If you do this at the end of a year, you can get back in Jan 1st of the next year without penalty. You could, depending on risk level, only be insured 9 months each year to save on costs. https://marketplace.cms.gov/technical-assistance-resources/e...

That's under the current ACA. The most likely repeal/replace bill replaces the individual mandate with a far stricter continuous coverage rule.

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#87

Post by LargeCompanies »

LargeCompanies wrote: post #46
coldcode wrote: post #6

I wonder if this healthcare.gov will exist a year from now. It is nice to see how far it has come in 2 years.

Doubtful Trump is getting rid of it. Personally I preferred the previous way of signing up for coverage ... call up a private insurer and sign up? The cost was less too as I wasn't paying for insurance for lazy sally or Joe Schmoe! So for me Obamacare/social medicine forced those who do and work to pay and cover for those who don't. See ya Obamacare(love obama though). Also the $300 plan I paid each month for sucked.…

All the liberals down voting me oh well... I'm an independent and didn't vote for that maniac or that queen!

This is a simple issue of how healthcare Became more expensive, less accessible (primary care docs hard to find and not readily available to see you.. so we flood the ERs), harder to use(insurance companies throw up the gauntlet and don't want to pay for things prescribed) and a real pain in the butt to sign up for.

All the above happened because of Obamacare and its eye towards helping every man, woman and child access to affordable healthcare. But that mantra goes against capitalism and thus creates a system where care is worse because insurance companies who once covered most things aren't so they have enough money/profit to pay for those men, women and children who are poor and can't pay. That demographic is the winner and all others are the losers in this game. It's a losing game either way and soon for the poor so and again see ya Obamacare ... socialistic ideas working within a capitalistic system is going to fail.

If it was completely socialistic it might work, but heck no the govt already taxes me enough I don't want them taxing me at 60 to 70 percent!

Hopefully it is replaced with a better system! Time will tell.

*typed on crappy iPhone 7 whose auto correctness/AI needs work!!!

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#88

Post by honkhonkpants »

rebootthesystem wrote: post #85
honkhonkpants wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did your premiums look like before? In my case I just didn't have insurance because there was no functioning market anywhere that would sell you a family health care plan including childbirth, at any price. Now I get health insurance from my employer which isn't affected by ACA so I don't know what the market looks like.

We were paying about $650 per month and a $4,000 annual deductible. Obamacare forced our insurer to cancel our plan. First lie: "If you like your plan you can keep it". The new plan was $1,450 per month and a $9,000 annual deductible. Second lie: "A family will save $2,500 per year". Even at that, we lost many of the doctors. Third lie: "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor". There's more in the details…

Do you think it's possible that your prior policy was one of the garbage plans that got outlawed by ACA? Those are the ones that didn't survive the "you can keep it" claims. Those were plans with uselessly low annual or lifetime limits, too much small print, etc.

Re: A Billion User Load Test on Healthcare.gov

#89

Post by delecti »

_delirium wrote: post #78
delecti wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on my understanding of the purpose of the Individual Mandate is that it's less that the well employed are subsidizing the under/unemployed, and more that the healthy are subsidizing the unhealthy. With everyone left to their own devices, the elderly/unhealthy are strongly incentivized to have insurance, and the young and healthy might reasonably conclude that their best bet is to not pay for insurance, that res…

People waiting until they get sick to sign up, essentially. The insurers' previous solution to this was no coverage of "pre-existing conditions". But people hated this generally, for various more or less good reasons. Banning exclusion of preexisting conditions is one of the handful of parts of Obamacare that's wildly popular across the political spectrum, at least among non-politicians (it polls something like 70-80…

Huh, I had never realized that purpose of the open enrollment period. It always seemed unnecessarily restrictive until now.
Post reply on HN