News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Automation Should Be Like Iron Man, Not Ultron by falcolas on Saturday May 21, 2016 @11:39AM (#11745025)
Here's one example from my experience:

There are many MySQL tools which are able to automate the process of failing over between a master and a slave. Github initially chose a solution which would trigger this failover automatically, when a master was unresponsive for a particular amount of time. One bad query came in, and the tool did it's job by failing over from the master to the slave. Here's the problem - the query was automatically retried against the slave, causing it to fail over back to the master. Repeatedly.

The solution? Page when MySQL became unresponsive, let a human initiate the failover, and let the tools handle the failover itself (which is a very complex dance to perform manually). I think they eventually moved to a model where it would fail over once per few hours, and alert if the condition occurred again.

Re:Automation Should Be Like Iron Man, Not Ultron by MikeTLive on Saturday May 21, 2016 @03:30PM (#11745841)
The same questions a human will ask can be encoded into your admin automation. It is only as powerful or accurate as the process allows.

If you don't already have a procedural flowchart build one. Have the human document the questions asked and answers followed.

Re:Automation Should Be Like Iron Man, Not Ultron by falcolas on Saturday May 21, 2016 @06:46PM (#11746537)
Only if you can foresee the problems and solutions to encode into the system. If you miss one, the system will fall down or make the wrong decision.
Re:Automation Should Be Like Iron Man, Not Ultron by XorNot on Saturday May 21, 2016 @10:49PM (#11747185)
That's a problem of historical data. What are you really doing when something "seems unusual"?
Re:Automation Should Be Like Iron Man, Not Ultron by virgilp on Monday May 23, 2016 @06:58AM (#11753027)
You're using your best judgment?