Challenges for Global Service from a Perspective of SRE 2nd season

Cookpad TechConf 2019: https://techconf.cookpad.com/2019/

Transcript

1. Cookpad Inc. Feb 27th, 2019 Takayuki Watanabe Technology Department SRE Group Challenges for Global Service
 from a Perspective of SRE ~ 2nd season ~
2. About me 2 • Takayuki Watanabe - Twitter: takanabe_w / GitHub: takanabe • Site Reliability Engineer (a.k.a SRE) - Focus on Cookpad Global Projects
3. Today’s menu 3 • What is Cookpad Global ? • Role of Site Reliability Engineers • Paving Roads for Autonomous Teams - Challenge 1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy - Challenge 2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
4. What is Cookpad Global ? 4
5. What is Cookpad Global Service? 5 +BQBOFTF
   $PPLQBE
   "QQ (MPCBM
   $PPLQBE
   "QQT What is Cookpad Global Service?
6. What is Cookpad Global Service? What is Cookpad Global Service? 6 +BQBOFTF
   $PPLQBE
   "QQ (MPCBM
   $PPLQBE
   "QQT JP Service ≠ Global Service
7. Our users across the globe 7 4FSWJDF
   QSPWJEFE
   DPVOUSJFT What is Cookpad Global Service?
8. What is Cookpad Global Service? Our users across the globe 8 4FSWJDF
   QSPWJEFE
   DPVOUSJFT 71 Countries 26 Languages
9. What is Cookpad Global Service? Our users across the globe 9 4FSWJDF
   QSPWJEFE
   DPVOUSJFT 94 Million Monthly Average Users
10. # of Recipes for Global Service 10 # of Recipes   0WFS
    
    NJMMJPO
    SFDJQFT
    
    
    NJMMJPO
    SFDJQFT
    TJODF
     What is Cookpad Global Service?
11. Users and Developers across the globe 11 • Global Service and SRE ? • Empower high perform technology organization Global head quarter 
 UK, Bristol 11
12. Users and Developers across the globe 12 • Global Service and SRE ? • Empower high perform technology organization Global head quarter 
 UK, Bristol 12 100 People 25 Nationalities
13. Users and Developers across the globe 13 • Global Service and SRE ? • Empower high perform technology organization Global head quarter 
 UK, Bristol 13 The best people join from all over the world
14. Role of Site Reliability Engineers 14
15. 15
16. 16 A user living beyond a log
17. 17
18. 18 Our Product Developers
19. Missions for SREs in Cookpad 19 • Maximize user experiences in terms of: • Service availability • Performance • Security • etc… • Build a great platform to support a growing product • Product development optimized platform • Software architects owning comprehensive knowledge for technology Role of Site Reliability Engineers
20. Missions for SREs in Cookpad 20 • Maximize user experiences in terms of: • Service availability • Performance • Security • etc… • Build a great platform to support a growing product • Product development optimized platform • Software architects owning comprehensive knowledge for technology Role of Site Reliability Engineers Control service availability based on various factors
21. SRE technology scope in Cookpad 21 4FSWJDF
    
    1MBUGPSNT w 7.
    
    $POUBJOFS
    1MBUGPSN
    PO
    "84 Role of Site Reliability Engineers
22. SRE technology scope in Cookpad 22 4FSWJDF
    
    1MBUGPSNT 0CTFSWBCJMJUZ
    &OHJOFFSJOH .JTD
    JOIPVTF
    5PPMJOH 3FMFBTF
    &OHJOFFSJOH 3FTJMJFODF
    &OHJOFFSJOH w %JTUSJCVUFE
    5SBDJOH
    w .FUSJDT
    .POJUPSJOH
    w -PHHJOH
    4ZTUFN
    w "MFSUT
    .BOBHFNFOU
    w .-
    #BTFE
    "OPNBMZ
    %FUFDUJPO
    w %BUB
    "OBMZTJT w 5FBN
    )FBMUI
    7JTVBMJ[BUJPO
    w "84
    $PTU
    0QUJNJ[BUJPO
    w %FWFMPQFS
    'SJFOEMZ
    "VUI
    4ZTUFN
    w FUD
    
    
    
    w %FQMPZ
    1JQFMJOF
    w $POUJOVPVT
    *OUFHSBUJPO
    w $POUJOVPVT
    %FMJWFSZ
    w %FQMPZ
    4USBUFHZ w /8
    'BVMU
    *OKFDUJPO
    w 4QPU
    *OTUBODF
    w $JSDVJU
    #SFBLFS
    w 5ISPUUMJOH w 7.
    
    $POUBJOFS
    1MBUGPSN
    PO
    "84 Role of Site Reliability Engineers
23. 23 Challenges in 2018 Attacks from China GDPR Recipe data migration EKS based staging Recruitment in UK Observability Full containerization 23 Spot instances Expense reduction Toil analysis automation
24. Paving Roads for Autonomous Teams 24
25. Paving Roads for Autonomous Teams 25 • Challenge 1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy • Challenge 2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
26. Challenge 1 Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy 26
27. Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy 27 • Tipping Points for Autonomous Teams • Organization Transformation: Chapter and Squad • Development style change for new team structure • Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy
28. Tipping Points for Autonomous Teams 28 • Cookpad employees in UK • 2016: 5 people • 2017: 50 people • 2018: 100 people Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& 1. .- Team structure in 2016, 2017
29. Tipping Points for Autonomous Teams 29 Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy lines = n(n − 1) 2
30. Tipping Points for Autonomous Teams 30 Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy lines = n(n − 1) 2 Communication cost ↑
31. Organization Transformation: Chapter and Squad 31 Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& Chapter 1. 1. 1. Product Squad .- Cross-platform Squad ɾɾɾ 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& 1. .- After Before
32. Organization Transformation: Chapter and Squad 32 Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& Chapter 1. 1. 1. Product Squad .- Cross-platform Squad ɾɾɾ 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& 1. .- After Before
33. Organization Transformation: Chapter and Squad 33 Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& Chapter 1. 1. 1. Product Squad .- Cross-platform Squad ɾɾɾ 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& 1. .- After Before
34. 1 34 Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& Chapter 1. 1. 1. Product Squad .- Cross-platform Squad ɾɾɾ 8FC J04 "OESPJE 2" 43& 1. .- After Before Conway's law … http://www.melconway.com/Home/Conways_Law.html
35. Development style change for new team structure 35 • Architecture of new feed • New development styles Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure
36. Architecture of new feed 36 Message broker Main API Cache Feed API DB Complete feed json/html Cache DB GET /user_id/feed List of activity primary keys in order, paginated Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure
37. Architecture of new feed 37 Message broker Main API Cache Feed API DB Complete feed json/html Cache DB New components developed by a squad GET /user_id/feed List of activity primary keys in order, paginated Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure
38. New development styles (Partial release in production) 38 # WIP code for new notification system # https://github.com/cookpad/xxxxxx-squad/issues/yyyyyy Rollout.add :notification_center, owner: "xxxxxx-squad" do # @developer_a, @developer_b, @developer_c, @developer_d, @developer_e Current.user&.id&.in?([AAAAAA, BBBBBB, CCCCCC, DDDDDD, EEEEEE]) end • Feature toggle (application level control) • Prototype environment (platform level control) Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure
39. Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure New development styles (Partial release in production) 39 # WIP code for new notification system # https://github.com/cookpad/xxxxxx-squad/issues/yyyyyy Rollout.add :notification_center, owner: "xxxxxx-squad" do # @developer_a, @developer_b, @developer_c, @developer_d, @developer_e Current.user&.id&.in?([AAAAAA, BBBBBB, CCCCCC, DDDDDD, EEEEEE]) end • Feature toggle (application level control) • Prototype environment (platform level control) Only users know answers
40. Feed was successful feature? 40 • Yes, feed was one of the most successful features in 2018 • New architecture • New technology stack • 100% release in production in short time Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure
41. 41 Why feed was successful? • A lot of trials, failures and improvements in short term • Developers had power and responsibility for feature developments • Feed was developed from scratch • Developers could choose appropriate technology • Introduce Streamy, Karafka (stream app frameworks) • Test Kafka, RabbitMQ, SQS, Kinesis (message brokers) Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure
42. Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure 42 Why feed was successful? • A lot of trials, failures and improvements in short term • Developers had power and responsibility for feature developments • Feed was developed from scratch • Developers could choose appropriate technology • Introduce Streamy, Karafka (stream app frameworks) • Test Kafka, RabbitMQ, SQS, Kinesis (message brokers) Rapid prototyping was successful
43. Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Development style change for new team structure 43 Why feed was successful? • A lot of trials, failures and improvements in short term • Developers had power and responsibility for feature developments • Feed was developed from scratch • Developers could choose appropriate technology • Introduce Streamy, Karafka (stream app frameworks) • Test Kafka, RabbitMQ, SQS, Kinesis (message brokers) On the other hand …
44. Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability 44 Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability
45. Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability 45 Too many errors SREs cannot understand…
46. 46 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT OFX
    QSPEVDU IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ OFX
    QSPEVDU Happiness Quadrant (release new feed) Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability
47. 47 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ UPVHI
    FYQFSJFODFT OFX
    QSPEVDU Happiness Quadrant (release new feed) Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability
48. 48 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT UPVHI
    FYQFSJFODFT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ OFX
    QSPEVDU Happiness Quadrant (release new feed) Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability
49. 49 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT UPVHI
    FYQFSJFODFT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ OFX
    QSPEVDU Happiness Quadrants (Release new feed) Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability
50. Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability 50 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT UPVHI
    FYQFSJFODFT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ OFX
    QSPEVDU Happiness Quadrants (Release new feed) Not sustainable …
51. 51 Why this situation happen? • A lot of trials, failures and improvements in short term • Developers had power and responsibility for feature developments • Feed was developed from scratch • Developers could choose appropriate technology • Introduce Streamy, Karafka (stream app frameworks) • Test Kafka, RabbitMQ, SQS, Kinesis (message brokers) • No concepts of shared responsibility for service availability Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability
52. 52 (WIP) Shared responsibility as Autonomous Teams • Shared responsibility for organization sustainability • Reach consensus of service availability for each feature • Targets decided by product owners • Higher quality in emergency notifications • Alert handling by appropriate people • Another organization transformation based on ideal tech & business architectures Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability
53. 53 • Shared responsibility for organization sustainability • Reach consensus of service availability for each feature • Targets decided by product owners • Higher quality in emergency notifications • Alert handling by appropriate people • Another organization transformation based on ideal tech & business architectures Challenge1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy > Necessity of shared responsibility for service availability Inverse Conway Maneuver … (WIP) Shared responsibility as Autonomous Teams
54. Challenge 2 Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams 54
55. Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams 55 • Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams • Feasible Self-service for Developers • Our focused scope • Full-containerization • No ssh debugging Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
56. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 56 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, Deploy pipeline Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
57. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 57 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, Deploy pipeline Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
58. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 58 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, Deploy pipeline Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
59. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 59 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, Deploy pipeline Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
60. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 60 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, deploy pipeline, feature toggle Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
61. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 61 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, deploy pipeline, feature toggle Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams Organization strategy matter
62. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 62 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, deploy pipeline, feature toggle Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams Organization strategy matter Strong leaderships across tech and business are essential
63. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 63 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, deploy pipeline, feature toggle Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams SRE squad can contribute
64. Four Important Keys for Successful Autonomous Teams 64 • Discipline: Common rules in organization - Technology stack, team structure • Freedom: Ownership for individual developments - Small team, technology selection, system design • Responsibility: Commitments for whole software life cycle - Design, implementation, test, deploy, service availability monitoring • Optimization: Best practices for product developments - Logging and monitoring system, deploy pipeline, feature toggle Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams SRE squad can contribute Optimized self-service mechanisms providing company-wide best practices in SRE
65. Feasible Self-service for Developers 65 • Low learning cost • e.g: Are you sure that developers are happy to learn and maintain k8s yaml? • Secure and painless operations in production • e.g: Are experiences provided by SREs comfortable and secure for developers? Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
66. Our focused scope 66 • Full-containerization • No ssh debugging Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
67. 67 Full-containerization
68. Pros of Applications on Container Platform 68 • Developers can control software version upgrade timing • SREs don’t want to maintain legacy VM based service platform • Application of in-house tools and company-wide best practices • Auto Scaling • Cost optimization (spot fleets) • Container apps deployment tool (hako) • Centralized developer console (hako-console) • Easy service mesh integration • etc … • Immutable infrastructure • version controlled applications and infrastructures • No configuration drifts Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
69. Pros of Applications on Container Platform 69 • Developers can control software version upgrade timing • SREs don’t want to maintain legacy VM based service platform • Application of in-house tools and company-wide best practices • Auto Scaling • Cost optimization (spot fleets) • Container apps deployment tool (hako) • Centralized developer console (hako-console) • Easy service mesh integration • etc … • Immutable infrastructure • version controlled applications and infrastructures • No configuration drifts Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
70. Development Lead Time 70
71. 71 %FW 43&
72. 72 72
73. 73 73 Gaps between Devs & SREs …
74. Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade without container) 74 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ 6OQSPEVDUJWF
    UBTLT /FX
    TPGUXBSF
    WFSTJPO Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
75. 75 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT #MPDLFE
    UJNF
    FYQFSJFODF /FX
    TPGUXBSF
    WFSTJPO /FX
    TPGUXBSF
    WFSTJPO IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade without container) 6OQSPEVDUJWF
    UBTLT Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
76. 76 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT 5PUBM
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade without container) Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
77. 77 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT 5PUBM
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ (SFBU
    NFDIBOJTN
    NJHIU
    QVU
    UIF
    WFDUPS
    POUP
    UIF
    TU
    RVBESBOU
    ʜ Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade without container) Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
78. Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization Happiness quadrant (Software Upgrade without container) 78 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT 5PUBM
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ (SFBU
    NFDIBOJTN
    NJHIU
    QVU
    UIF
    WFDUPS
    POUP
    UIF
    TU
    RVBESBOU
    ʜ Run all stateless applications on container clusters
79. Progress of Full-containerization in Global 79 Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
80. Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization Progress of Full-containerization in Global 80 17/18 apps are running on containers (94 % is completed)
81. 81 81 %FW
82. 82 82 5IF
    EBUF
    3VCZ
    
    XBT
    SFMFBTFE
    %FD
    UI %FWFMPQFST
    DBO
    DPOUSPM
    3VCZ
    WFSTJPOT
    XJUIPVU
    43&T`
    TVQQPSUT %FW
83. 83 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT USBJOJOH
    DPTU MFBSOJOH
    DPTU /FX
    TPGUXBSF
    WFSTJPO /FX
    TPGUXBSF
    WFSTJPO
    
    PQFSBUJPOBM
    DPTU
    SFEVDUJPO IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade with container) Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
84. 84 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT 5PUBM
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade with container) Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization
85. Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization 85 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT 5PUBM
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade with container) Win - Win
86. Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > Full-containerization 86 %FWFMPQFST`
    IBQQJOFTT 43&T`
    IBQQJOFTT 5PUBM
    IBQQJOFTT IBQQZ IBQQZ VOIBQQZ VOIBQQZ Happiness Quadrant (Software Upgrade with container) Plus, SREs can focus on container platform (more best practices can be introduced)
87. Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging SSH SSH 87 No ssh debugging
88. Cons of Applications on Container Platform 88 • Additional Complexities for Developers • Lack of tools cause chaos Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
89. Cons of Applications on Container Platform 89 • Additional Complexities for Developers • Lack of tools create chaos SFG
    IUUQTTQFBLFSEFDLDPNUBLBOBCFDIBMMFOHFTGPSHMPCBMTFSWJDFGSPNBQFSTQFDUJWFPGTSF TMJEF
90. Cons of Applications on Container Platform 90 • Additional Complexities for Developers • Lack of tools create chaos SFG
    IUUQTTQFBLFSEFDLDPNUBLBOBCFDIBMMFOHFTGPSHMPCBMTFSWJDFGSPNBQFSTQFDUJWFPGTSF TMJEF Already Enough ?
91. 91
92. Cons of Applications on Container Platform 92 • Additional Complexities for Developers • Lack of tools cause chaos • No ssh debugging systems for Global team • Granular and chronological order metrics dashboard • Container optimized New Relic agent deployment • Short-term log collection • Safe rails console for container Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
93. 93 $POUBJOFST 4IPSUUFSN
    5%# -POHUFSN
    5%# *OqVY%# 1SPNFUIFVT %FWFMPQFS EPXOTBNQMJOH FYQPSU
    NFUSJDT (SBGBOB 5JNFTFSJFT
    %BUBCBTF 6TFS
    *OUFSGBDF Granular and chronological metrics dashboard Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
94. 94 Granular and chronological metrics dashboard • Before • We cannot dig errors caused by spike resource saturations • After • We can recognize errors caused by spike resource saturations • We can judge that errors should be fixed soon or not Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
95. Container optimized New Relic agent deployment 95 $POUBJOFS TIBSFE
    NFNPSZ
    BHFOU
    TUBSU
    qBH IUUQBQQ@OFX@SFMJDTUBSU "11
    
    SBDLOFX@SFMJDTUBSUFS IBLPQBSUJBSFMJD
 FYFD
    DPOTVM
    MPDL Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
96. Container optimized New Relic agent deployment 96 • Before • ECS cannot deploy a New Relic agent to a specific container ( We want to save ) • Agents are gone when containers are killed accidentally • After • ECS can deploy a New Relic agent to a container • Distributed locking via `consul lock` sidecar • Rack middleware that provides an endpoint to start the New Relic agent • Agents are launched in a container when agent start flag exists on shared memory Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
97. Short-term log collection 97 $POUBJOFST 4IPSUUFSN
    MPH
    TFBSDI -POHUFSN
    MPH
    TFBSDI 4 "UIFOB &MBTUJDTFBSDI FYQPSU
    MPHT IBLPDPOTPMF -PH
    TFBSDI 6TFS
    *OUFSGBDF ,JCBOB %FWFMPQFS FYQPSU
    MPHT Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
98. Short-term log collection 98 • Before • Developers have to wait for few minutes to search logs • After • Developers can check logs nearly real-time Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
99. Safe rails console for container 99 $POUBJOFST &YQPSU
    BVEJU
    MPHT USBQEPPS
    DPOTPMF 6TFS
    *OUFSGBDF 4MBDL USBQEPPS
    BHFOU "11 *OUFSBDUJWF
    DPNNVOJDBUJPO
    
 WJB
    8FC4PDLFU %FWFMPQFS .BOBHF
    BDDFTT
    QSJWJMFHFT
    "[VSF"% USBQEPPS
    QSPYZ #JO
    FYFD *OUFSBDUJWF
    DPNNVOJDBUJPO
    
 WJB
    8FC4PDLFU
    EBUB
    POMZ
    DPOUBJOFS Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
100. Safe rails console for container 100 • Before • Developers ssh to servers and run `rails -c` (Sometimes `rails -c -s`) • Developers can run write queries in production ( historical technical debt ) • After • Developers can use REPL via web browser with safe options selected by SREs • Developers can only run read queries on designated database instance Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
101. Safe rails console for container (before) 101 takayuki-watanabe@ssh-accepatable-host-xxx:~$ date Thu Apr 19 10:53:28 UTC 2018 takayuki-watanabe@ssh-accepatable-host-xxx:~$ htop PID USER PRI NI VIRT RES SHR S CPU% MEM% TIME+ Command [snip] 31817 cookpad 20 0 794M 129M 188 R 93.7 1.7 1923h ruby bin/rails console production -s 8773 cookpad 20 0 734M 165M 152 R 91.7 2.2 1800h ruby bin/rails console production -s 8107 cookpad 20 0 959M 734M 14228 R 83.7 9.8 40h01:04 ruby bin/rails c production [snip] Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
102. Safe rails console for container (after) 102 Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging
103. Safe rails console for container (after) 103 Challenge2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams > No ssh debugging Feasible Self-service make product development reliable and autonomous !!
104. Recap 104 • What is Cookpad Global ? • Role of Site Reliability Engineers • Paving Roads for Autonomous Teams - Challenge 1: Organization Transformation for Greater Autonomy - Challenge 2: Feasible Self-service for Autonomous Teams
105. 105 Thank you !! (takayuki-watanabe@cookpad.com)