Skip to main content

Bugs that cover each other

By
This week I had the opportunity to work on a PoC that was pretty challenging. In a very short period of time we had to test our ideas and come with some results. When you need to do something like this, you have to:

  • Design
  • Implement
  • Test
  • Measure (Performance Test)

First two steps were pretty straight, we didn’t had any kind of problems. The testing of the current solution was pretty good, we find some small issues – small problems that were resolved easily.
We started the performance test, when we here hit by a strange behaviors. The database server had 3-4 minutes with a 100% load, after this period the load would go down to 0% for 5-6 minutes. This was like a cycle that used to repeat to infinity.
The load of the database should be 100% all the time… We looked over the backend server, everything looked okay. They were received requests from client bots and processed. Based on the load of the backend everything should be fine.
Next step was to look over the client bots machines. Based on the tracking information everything should be fine… But still we had a strange behaviors in the database, something was not right.
We started to take each part of the solution and debug it. We started with …SQL store procedures …backend and …client bots. When we looked over client bots we observed that we have a strange behaviors there. For each request we received at least to different responses.
After 1 hours of debugging we found out that we had 2 different bugs. The interesting part of this was that one of the bugs created a behaviors that masked the other bug. Because of this on the backend we had the impression that we have the expected behavior and the clients’ works well.
The second bug that was masked by the first one has big and pretty ugly.
In conclusion I would say that when even when you write a PoC and you don’t have enough time, try to test with one, two and 3 clients in parallel. We tested with one, 10 and 100 clients. Because of the logs flow for 10 and 100 clients we were not able to observe the strange behaviors before starting the performance testing.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

By
In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...
Post a Comment
Read more

Can User Technical Profile Influence AI Architecture Decisions?

By
In the last few days, I ran a small experiment on Devin/Windsurf/Cascade, BMAD, and LLM-based architecture decisions. The initial concern was simple: if an AI coding assistant knows something about the user, for example, that the user is a Java developer or a .NET developer, can this information influence the architecture and technology stack that the AI will propose? This question is important because many companies are starting to use AI tools not only for coding but also for product discovery, architecture, documentation, and technical decision-making. If the AI is influenced by the developer's personal profile, the result may not be fully neutral. It may look like a business or architecture decision, but in reality, it may be partially shaped by the context of the person using the tool. The test was done using BMAD with Devin/Windsurf/Cascade. The scenario was a unified field service operations platform. The task was to let BMAD refine the product, define the architecture and s...
Post a Comment
Read more

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

By
Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see...
8 comments
Read more