Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ...
4
5
6
  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodykiller86 View Post
    did i say at all that it would help with bad code? no lol im just saying azure servers will be way better than anything else
    Not necessarily, no. They'd be unlikely to migrate to Azure anyway, since that would remove a lot of capacity from that part of Microsoft's business. Blizzard has already built the infrastructure to run WoW, so they'll 99.9% just keep using that. Additionally, a cloud migration of that scale would cost a lot of money, take a year or longer, and could break a lot of things that are already working just fine as is. Sorry, but you have no idea what you're talking about.
    Last edited by dwarven; 2022-12-09 at 08:35 PM.

  2. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodykiller86 View Post
    jesus christ I DIDNT SAY it would help with this issue omfg! lol im just saying IN GENERAL Azure servers would be better in the long run than what they use you fool. Im in IT of course i know that issue they explained wouldnt make a difference on Azure servers it would just have more capacity to run until it killed itself if anything at all lol
    Jesus H Christ...

  3. #103
    The Lightbringer chrisisvacant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Formerly SF. Now Sydney.
    Posts
    3,356
    Quote Originally Posted by Relapses View Post
    It's hard to say whether the author was specifically chosen because of the "poor documentation" you're implying or because that's simply how Blizzard operates. Either way it's fairly immaterial, though I'm sure Blizzard learned lessons from this.
    It's pretty easy to say if you work in deployments.

    If he's still there and he built the code, he's the best candidate to fix what he did because he's going to have a better idea of how he did what he did. Even if other people can read his code, doesn't matter, he's already there and the project was his. Documentation or not - though it's true that engineers don't tend to be very engineer friendly when they are deciding how and if to document anything.

  4. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisisvacant View Post
    It's pretty easy to say if you work in deployments.

    If he's still there and he built the code, he's the best candidate to fix what he did because he's going to have a better idea of how he did what he did. Even if other people can read his code, doesn't matter, he's already there and the project was his. Documentation or not - though it's true that engineers don't tend to be very engineer friendly when they are deciding how and if to document anything.
    Right, I guess I just find it weird to assume the latter must be the case when the former is just as plausible. /shrug

  5. #105
    The Lightbringer chrisisvacant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Formerly SF. Now Sydney.
    Posts
    3,356
    Quote Originally Posted by Relapses View Post
    Right, I guess I just find it weird to assume the latter must be the case when the former is just as plausible. /shrug
    I'm actually just surprised he's still there. Must be newish work, which leads me to believe this is gonna come up in his annual review.

  6. #106
    That is the longest "We made some last minute changes that we didn't test properly and then everything turned to shit" post that I have ever read.

  7. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodykiller86 View Post
    jesus christ I DIDNT SAY it would help with this issue omfg! lol im just saying IN GENERAL Azure servers would be better in the long run than what they use you fool. Im in IT of course i know that issue they explained wouldnt make a difference on Azure servers it would just have more capacity to run until it killed itself if anything at all lol
    Rephrasing your fallacy does not support its position so much as make you persistent and still wrong. As someone who has been in the technology field for almost 30 years, I can say with 100% certainty that you have no idea what you're talking about.

    Azure, AWS, GCP would have no better improvements or making the problem worse for Blizzard with or without the caveat of the current situation. How could I say that? Because if I don't know what their hardware situation is, there's no rational or logical reason to speculate in either direction. You can have an opinion on the topic, but you have zero facts to support it.

    Stop while you're behind. It just reinforces your lack of knowledge and, apparently, your inability to use punctuation.

  8. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by Feeline10 View Post
    Probably is fine, by the way. Do you think this person was disciplined or reprimanded or something?

    Does anyone besides 1 or 2 other people in this thread work for a living and know what it's like to be at an IT company? Do you think this person did this maliciously? Are you not aware of the groundbreaking tech every expansion that Blizzard introduces which most other companies then adopt? It then becomes the industry standard. Please don't confuse Dragonriding / Guild Wars 2 with "groundbreaking tech," either. That idea may have been lifted, but that's not what I'm referring to. I'm referring to things like LFG, Shards, etc.

    Say whatever you want but Blizzard still has some of the best talent in the industry.
    I work as a lead software dev for 8 years now, I know shit happens. All I mentioned was that it sucked to be them at that point, you never want to be the one to introduce a major prod issue. Obviously it's not entirely your fault if it passes all peer reviews, testing and what not.

    No I don't think they got fired, if anything, they have likely built additional regression testing against these types of issues.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •