|
|
|
|
|
by throwaway894345
1942 days ago
|
|
> that'll be really really hard and take a long time It probably is hard and intensive. Engineering shouldn't lie and promise that it will be easier. Product has to take that engineering estimate and determine whether to work uptime or some sexy feature (and sexy features usually win because of perverse incentives). Moreover, I have a hard time believing this for a couple reasons: first of all, I've scarcely met engineers who were opposed to improving product reliability, maintainability, etc. The portrait of Google engineers arguing that database services fundamentally shouldn't be HA (and customers are "using it wrong" for wanting HA DBs) is particularly incredulous. Secondly, I've never heard of an organization where engineering held political power over product decisions, but I have worked in several places where product dictated engineering solutions. Businesses trust product more readily than engineering because the things that engineering is always petitioning for are abstract and "costly" (deferring some immediate profit for reduced costs in the long run) while the things product wants are usually tangible and profitable. |
|