Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Karunamon 4850 days ago
>You can't sue heroku for their marketing speak.

You can sue anyone for anything, success is not assured.

That bit of pedantry aside, Heroku led people on to believe that their queueing backend was intelligently distributing requests to nodes. Rather than randomly.

You are not allowed to argue this, as Heroku themselves acknowledged it!

Furthermore, they blatantly lied about it. From the rap genius article:

Heroku claims that though they received reports of unexplained latency over the past couple of years, they weren’t able to figure out the request queuing issue until they read the Rap Genius article. But there is evidence that Heroku knew about the problem for more than 2 years.

And the conclusion, also from the same article:

Based on Heroku's response so far, it appears their approach to fixing the problem is, “We promised you intelligent routing, we delivered random routing (which is worse than intelligent routing), so we're going to change our documentation to make it clear that we're only promising you random routing.”

This works for future customers, since once Heroku makes these documentation changes, everyone who signs up will understand exactly how routing works. But it does nothing to address the time and money that existing customers have spent over the past few years. What does Heroku owe them?

1 comments

Who's to say random routing doesn't qualify as "intelligent"? What if random routing is the most efficient routing schema for 99% of their users? Trying to sue because "intelligent" doesn't mean what you think it means isn't going to be very successful.
>Who's to say random routing doesn't qualify as "intelligent"?

Heroku themselves!

Again, they changed their documentation.

You mean..they changed their marketing speak. Suing because buzzwords don't work the way you think they should isn't a very good basis for a lawsuit.
>You mean..they changed their marketing speak.

Marketing speak is not allowed to be misleading or flatly untrue (as it was in Heroku's case). This can and has been the basis of successful lawsuits.

I don't know how "intelligent routing" can be defined to mean anything. It can be interpreted a million different ways. This is probably one of the reasons why they used it in their marketing because it sounds cool and is a generic term that could be applied to anything.

I don't see much of anything in a lawsuit unless specific metrics related to SLA's that were agreed to were broken.

The documentation used to say that requests were routed to the next idle dyno, but the behaviour was silently changed to be random distribution, which is substantially worse for the customer. There seemed to be previous cases where Heroku were aware of the discrepancy but didn't act to fix it.

That's generally considered uncool.