Disagree completely, it's the frank detail that makes me trust their story.
Has Flexential provided a similarly detailed, public root cause analysis? If so, maybe we can refer to it. If not, how do you expect us to read it?
Imagine if the literal power company failed, and took days to tell people what was going on. You can see why people are reading the postmortem that exists, rather than the one that doesn't.
They do both. They stated what their problem was and they stated their due diligence in picking a DC
> While the PDX-04’s design was certified Tier III before construction and is expected to provide high availability SLAs
They said the core issue: innovating fast, which led to not requiring in the high availability cluster.
Which is also a fix.
From cloudflare 's POV, part of what made it originally worse, is the lack of communication by the DC.
Which is an issue, if you want to inform clients.
I really appreciate that they're going to fix the process errors here. But as they suggested, there's a tension between moving fast and being sure. This is typically managed like the weather, buying rain jackets afterwards (not optimal). I'd be curious to see how they can make reliability part of the culture without tying development up in process.
Perhaps they can model the system in software, then use traffic analytics to validate their models. If they can lower the cost of reliability experiments by doing virtual experiments, they might be able to catch more before roll-out.