구조 잡기 · Why does the same outage keep recurring?

질문

Why does the same outage keep recurring?

한쪽이 다른 쪽에 크게 영향을 줍니까? 던진 표의 4분의 3으로 정합니다.

게스트로 보는 중. 참여하려면 닉네임을 입력하세요.

질문은 그룹별로 나뉘어, 내 그룹이 받은 질문만 나옵니다. 전체 180개가 다 나오지는 않습니다.

이유

수백 개의 쌍을 혼자 답할 수는 없습니다. 각 쌍은 한 그룹에 갑니다. 의견이 갈린 쌍은 다른 그룹에 넘어가므로, 다른 곳에서 시작한 쌍이 나중에 내 목록에 나올 수 있습니다. 확정된 수에는 모든 그룹의 작업이 들어가므로, 내 목록이 줄어드는 것보다 빨리 늘어납니다.

확정 176 / 180 내가 답할 질문 0개

지난 집계: 결정 176 · 그룹 간 패널로 넘김 1 · 이견 있음 0 · 최소 인원 미달 3 — 패널마다 던진 표가 최소 max(2, 패널의 75%) 필요합니다. 가장 작은 패널의 멤버는 15명입니다.

닫기 ✕

Reliability has no budget line of its own → 영향을 주나? → The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it

아직 아무 말도 없습니다.

끝난 단계입니다. 쌍과 투표 기록은 위에 있습니다.논리 확인 ↗

Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	미결	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	…	미결	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	미결	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	미결 넘김	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✓ 예	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✓ 예	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	Every team has its own logging format	✓ 예	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✓ 예	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✓ 예	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✓ 예	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✓ 예	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✓ 예	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✓ 예	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✓ 예	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✓ 예	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✓ 예	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✓ 예	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✓ 예	보는 중 ↑ · 닫기 ✕
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✓ 예	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✓ 예	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✓ 예	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✓ 예	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✓ 추론됨	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✓ 추론됨	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Customers report outages before monitoring does	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	Customers report outages before monitoring does	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	Tests that fail intermittently are retried until green	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Every team has its own logging format	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	Error budgets exist on a slide and nowhere else	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortems assign actions to people who were not in the room	→	One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Alerts fire so often that on-call mutes them	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
One engineer knows how the payment path actually works	→	Every team has its own logging format	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	→	The on-call rota has the same two people on it most weeks	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Post-mortem actions are written up and then never scheduled	→	Feature work always outranks reliability work in planning	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	The service map in the wiki is two years old	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	Config lives in five places and drifts between them	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Config lives in five places and drifts between them	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Reliability has no budget line of its own	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	Feature flags are never cleaned up, so nobody knows which paths are live	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The service map in the wiki is two years old	→	The same three services cause most of the pages	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	…	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The staging environment does not resemble production	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The incident channel fills with people asking for status instead of giving it	→	The staging environment does not resemble production	✗ 아니요	논의하기
The same three services cause most of the pages	→	Rollbacks take longer than the outage they are meant to end	✗ 아니요	논의하기
…	→	Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	✗ 아니요	논의하기
Retries are unbounded, so a slow dependency becomes a flood	→	Reliability has no budget line of its own	✗ 아니요	논의하기