Skip to main content

Bugs that cover each other

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

Popular posts from this blog

Windows Docker Containers can make WIN32 API calls, use COM and ASP.NET WebForms

After the last post , I received two interesting questions related to Docker and Windows. People were interested if we do Win32 API calls from a Docker container and if there is support for COM. WIN32 Support To test calls to WIN32 API, let’s try to populate SYSTEM_INFO class. [StructLayout(LayoutKind.Sequential)] public struct SYSTEM_INFO { public uint dwOemId; public uint dwPageSize; public uint lpMinimumApplicationAddress; public uint lpMaximumApplicationAddress; public uint dwActiveProcessorMask; public uint dwNumberOfProcessors; public uint dwProcessorType; public uint dwAllocationGranularity; public uint dwProcessorLevel; public uint dwProcessorRevision; } ... [DllImport("kernel32")] static extern void GetSystemInfo(ref SYSTEM_INFO pSI); ... SYSTEM_INFO pSI = new SYSTEM_INFO(...

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

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...

Cloud Myths: Cloud is Cheaper (Pill 1 of 5 / Cloud Pills)

Cloud Myths: Cloud is Cheaper (Pill 1 of 5 / Cloud Pills) The idea that moving to the cloud reduces the costs is a common misconception. The cloud infrastructure provides flexibility, scalability, and better CAPEX, but it does not guarantee lower costs without proper optimisation and management of the cloud services and infrastructure. Idle and unused resources, overprovisioning, oversize databases, and unnecessary data transfer can increase running costs. The regional pricing mode, multi-cloud complexity, and cost variety add extra complexity to the cost function. Cloud adoption without a cost governance strategy can result in unexpected expenses. Improper usage, combined with a pay-as-you-go model, can result in a nightmare for business stakeholders who cannot track and manage the monthly costs. Cloud-native services such as AI services, managed databases, and analytics platforms are powerful, provide out-of-the-shelve capabilities, and increase business agility and innovation. H...