CrowdStrikeOutage Sparks Call for Improved Fault Analysis and Release Processes

Optimizing Fault Impact Analysis and Change Release Processes: Lessons from the CrowdStrikeOutage

The recent CrowdStrike outage serves as a stark reminder of the critical importance ofcontinuously reviewing and maintaining high-standard review processes for submitting and deploying production changes. This is not a critique of CrowdStrike’s outage or its processes, but ratheran opportunity to revisit best practices and summarize outage analysis methodologies based on my experience reviewing complex systems handling millions of TPS.

A latent bug, apparently stemming from alack of null checks, led to the CrowdStrike outage. Social media saw a flurry of posts criticizing the developer who may have made the errant change. However, before diving into further details, I adhere to a principle: when reviewing incidentsimpacting customers, our focus should not be on who made the mistake, but rather on why it occurred.

Firstly, we must recognize that developers or operations personnel should not be blamed. Blaming them does not fundamentally improve the system’s current state. If the root cause lies in human error, it likely signifies a lack of necessary checks or fail-safe mechanisms within our systems. Our primary focus should be on understanding why their error was able to propagate through the system. We should strive to build systems, processes, and tools that minimize the likelihood ofoperational personnel making mistakes, particularly those with widespread impact on production systems. The goal is to create an environment where such errors are virtually impossible.

A crucial reminder: never let your workflows become overly complex – keep them simple while increasing the difficulty of making mistakes (e.g., preventing accidental table deletions).

Here aresome guiding principles for considering best practices that can help us intercept bugs before they reach production or, if they inevitably do, minimize their impact. These processes are equally applicable when analyzing outages and considering system improvements. Best practices and post-mortem outage analysis can generally be categorized into three areas: complete prevention, minimizing impact scope, and rapiddetection and recovery. We will delve into each of these categories in subsequent sections.

1. Complete Prevention

Let’s ask a fundamental question: how can we catch bugs or issues before they impact production systems? Solutions include: simple testing in local environments, setting high standards for code reviews, unit and integrationtest coverage, automated testing in deployment pipelines, and alerts before production deployment.

Establishing a Robust Sandbox (Development) Environment: Developers should have a complete and isolated environment where they can conduct rapid experimentation and testing with real data without impacting real users. While this is our desired goal, these environments often lack stability. This is becausemultiple developers test their changes simultaneously in one environment. One approach to address this is to ensure that on-call or support teams are also focused on addressing the instability of these environments while handling high-priority production issues.

While this is a good starting point, it is important to note that even with the best practices in place,bugs can still slip through the cracks. This is why it is crucial to have a robust system in place for detecting and mitigating the impact of bugs that do make it to production.

2. Minimizing Impact Scope

Even with the best preventative measures, some bugs may still reach production. In such cases,we need to minimize their impact. This involves:

Feature Flags: Using feature flags allows us to enable or disable new features in production without requiring a full deployment. This allows us to test new features in a controlled environment and roll them back quickly if they cause problems.
Canary Releases: Canary releasesinvolve deploying a new version of the software to a small subset of users before releasing it to the entire user base. This allows us to identify and fix bugs before they affect a large number of users.
Blue-Green Deployments: Blue-green deployments involve running two identical versions of the software, one blue and one green. The blue version is the live version, while the green version is a staging environment. When a new version of the software is ready, it is deployed to the green environment. Once the green version is deemed stable, traffic is switched over to the green version, and the blue version becomes thenew staging environment. This allows for seamless rollbacks if necessary.

3. Rapid Detection and Recovery

Even with the best prevention and mitigation strategies, some bugs may still cause outages. In these situations, it is crucial to detect and recover quickly. This involves:

Monitoring: Comprehensive monitoring ofkey metrics, including performance, availability, and error rates, is essential for detecting problems early.
Alerting: Alerting systems should be configured to notify the appropriate teams of critical issues.
Incident Response: A well-defined incident response plan should be in place to ensure that the rightpeople are involved in resolving the issue quickly and effectively.

Conclusion

Optimizing fault impact analysis and change release processes is an ongoing journey. By embracing best practices, implementing robust systems, and fostering a culture of continuous improvement, we can minimize the impact of bugs and outages, ensuring a smoother and more reliable experience forour users.

References