Chai 2000 - 2017
I lost my little buddy of 17 years this week.
Chai, I’m happy you had a peaceful morning in the patio at our new house doing what you loved. Sitting under bushes and in the sun. Even in your last day you still comforted us. You were relaxed throughout the morning, when I picked you up and held you as we drove to the vet till the end.
Chai, thank you for everything, we love you and you will be missed.
Why We Use Buzzwords
WebOps, SecOps, NetOps, DevOps, DevSecOps, ChatOps, NoOps, DataOps. They’re not just buzzwords. They’re a sign of a lack of resources.
I believe one reason why people keep coming up with newer versions of *Ops is there isn’t enough time or people to own the priorities that are being prepended to it. Forgot about the acronyms and the buzzwords and ask yourself why a new *Ops keep coming up.
It’s not always marketing hype. When people are struggling to find the resources to address one or multiple concerns they’ll latch onto anything that might help.
When systems administrators started building and supporting services that ran web sites we started calling it WebOps to differentiate that type of work from the more traditional SA role.
When DevOps came about, it was a reaction from SAs trying to build things at a speed that matched the needs of the companies that employed them. The success of using the label DevOps to frame that work encouraged others to orientate themselves around it as a way to achieve that same level of success.
Security is an early example and I can remember seeing talks and posts related to using DevOps as a framework to meet their needs.
Data related work seemed to be mostly absent. It seems instead we got a number of services, consultants, and companies that focused around providing a better database or some kind of big data product.
Reflecting back there are two surprises. The first being an early trend of including nontechnical departments in the DevOps framework. Adding your marketing department was one I saw a couple of different posts and talks on.
The second is even with the Software Defined Networking providing a programmatic path for traditional network engineering in the DevOps framework it really hasn’t been a standout. Most of the tools available are usually tied to big expensive gear and this seems to have kept network engineering outside of DevOps. The difference being if you are using a cloud platform that provides SDN then DevOps can cover the networking side.
ChatOps is the other interesting one, because it’s the one focused on the least technical thing. The difficulty people have communicating with other parts of their company and with easily finding information to basic questions that frequently come up.
This got me thinking of breaking the different types of engineering and/or development work needed into three common groups. And the few roles that have either been removed from some companies, outsourced, or they’re understaffed.
The three common groups include software engineer for front-end, back-end, mobile, and tooling. Systems engineering to provide the guidance and support for the entire product lifecycle; including traditional SA and operations roles, SRE, and tooling. The third is data engineering which covers traditional DBA roles, analytics, and big data.
Then you have QA, network engineering, and information security which seem to either have gone away unless you’re at a company that’s big enough to provide a dedicated team or has a specific requirement for them.
For QA it seems we’ve moved it from being a role into a responsibility everyone is accountable to.
Network engineering and security are two areas that I’m starting to wonder if they’ll be dispersed across the three common groups just as QA has been for the most part. Maybe SDN would move control of the network to software and system engineers? There is an obvious benefit to hold everyone accountable for security as we’ve done with QA.
This wouldn’t mean there’s no need for network and security professionals anymore, but that you would probably only find them in certain circumstances.
Which brings me back to my original point. Why the need for all of these buzzwords? With the one exception every single version of*Ops is focused on the non-product feature related work. We’re seeing reductions in the number of roles focused on that type of work while at the same time its importance has increased.
I think it’s important that we’re honest with ourselves and consider that maybe the way we do product management and project planning hasn’t caught up with the changes in the non-product areas of engineering. If it had do you think we would have see all of these new buzzwords?
It Was Never About Ops
For a while I’ve been thinking about Susan J. Fowler’s Ops Identitfy Crisis post. Bits I agreed with and some I did not.
My original reaction to the post was pretty pragmatic. I had concerns (and still do) about adding more responsibilities onto software engineers (SWE). It’s already fairly common to have them responsible for QA, database administration and security tasks but now ops issues are being considered as well.
I suspect there is an as of yet unmeasured negative impact to the productivity of teams that keep expanding the role of SWE. You end up deprioritizing the operations and systems related concerns, because new features and bug fixes will always win out when scheduling tasks.
Over time I’ve refined my reaction to this. The traditional operations role is the hole that you’ve been stuck in and engineering is how you get out of that hole. It’s not that you don’t need Ops teams or engineers anymore. It’s simply that you’re doing it wrong.
The Loss of a Sense Doesn’t Always Heighten the Others
Over a two week break my wife and I were talking about a statement she read where someone was called the “long time embedded photojournalist for Burning Man” and how she disagreed with this. This person wasn’t shooting for any news organization. They’re known to be one of the Burning Man faithful which removes some impartiality they may have. In essence they’re a PR photographer for Burning Man.
This made me consider most of the output from social media is in one of two different camps. The first is “Free PR” and the second is “Critics”. You’re either giving away free material to promote an idea, organization, product, or a person or you’re criticizing them.
A Need for a Honest Look at How We Do Incident Management
Compared with other fields ours is still young and we haven’t figured out all the things just yet. The natural tight connection between academics, open source software and the improvements we’ve already seen can make it easy to think we’re already doing all of the hard work. All of which has been on specific technical challenges and very little on how we as an industry should improve how we work.
Consider the difference between how much attention we place on data we collect from the servers and services we support compared with what we have available for our entire field. We love dashboards and metrics to the point that they’re used to drive businesses and/or teams. Why haven’t we done the same thing at the macro level to help improve and guide our profession?