Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In most of my scenarios, I'd actually rather cause a catastrophic global change than a silent subtle corruption of a handful of rows


That may be fun in a trivial setup such as op’s but when millions of customers or billions of transactions are affected it’s a nightmare. A competent engineer runs queries against a local and then a uat db, verifies results and then on prod. But if you must do it in prod then it must be limited in scope.


We're on the same page with the best approach, I just don't consider corrupting an unpredictable subset of my database much of an improvement. It's not closer to correct, it's just still incorrect.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: