[mtippett]

I agree with most of what is suggested in the article.

However a big part is missing is the reality that there are a set of hypotheses (is that right) in play at any point in time. A lot of debugging is the cycle of

1. Think about the system, gather any available data - you can't boil the ocean 2. Consider a set of hypotheses possible cause (even if it is a partial cause) 3. Seek any method to either refute or confirm the possible cause which gives more data.

Wash, rinse, repeat. Each cycle will likely get closer to the problem.

Each cycle also is likely to find other tech debt that needs to be solved.

Rarely is there a single hypothesis that is right first time. Although an experienced person will prune out a lot of poor ideas automatically, and likely subconsciously.

Observability goes a long way to getting the data needed to confirm or refute.