Baby Steps to DevOps

Question

Baby Steps to DevOps

Steve Jones - SSC Editor

SSC Guru

Points: 736183
More actions
July 11, 2016 at 10:32 pm

#319891

Comments posted to this topic are about the item Baby Steps to DevOps

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

roger.plowman SSChampion Points: 10265 More actions · Answer 1

I *DON'T* work for Red Gate software, and I can tell you their SQL Compare and Data Compare are a god-send for the lone-wolf developer. If I had to track and script all the changes between database versions by hand... (shudder). Not to mention back-porting production data to QA and development is a great advantage for testing at scale.

I'm not a big fan of Dev Ops but I am a firm believer in the old saw "even a blind squirrel can find a nut now and then". Automation of grunt-work is a no-brainer. I use an automated tool to create the script from the ERD diagram (actually the ERD program is the tool!), I use a tool to migrate changes from the development scheme up to QA and from QA to production, and to backport the data to QA and development. I use a home-grown tool to build scripts to create stored procedures (which are then put in a version control system).

But none ofl that is Continuous Integration/Dev Ops/Continuous Delivery. It's the programming equivalent of using power tools. To my mind CI is more like a robotic factory that makes widgets.

Of course I'm a lone wolf developer. In the world of large IT departments they have big teams of developers and DBAs and documentation specialists and all the rest, so they can devote a LOT more resouces to Dev Ops, and in those environments with those resources it might make sense.

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736183 More actions · Answer 2

That stuff is exactly what's a part of CI/CD/DevOps. However, since you're alone, you don't need as much communication or transparency.

However, I wouldn't knock that and say it's not DevOps. That doesn't make sense.

CI isn't about widgets. CI is about having each commit tested independently and repeatably. The result is a Release Candidate if it passes. If not, it's code that has an issue. Using CI, even solo, is a good way to ensure that all the items you want checked for code are always run.

Andrew..Peterson SSCertifiable Points: 6838 More actions · Answer 3

Steve,

I think it is great that you continually push (CP) for CI/CD and now DevOps. I setup a shop over ten years ago with CI (continuous integration) and it was great. I just do not understand why it is still not the norm. And now, it seems that they needed to come up with a new label "devops" to that an old idea was "new and fresh."

So carry on to: CP for CI/CD/DevOps!

The more you are prepared, the less you need it.

TomThomson SSC Guru Points: 104773 More actions · Answer 4

I very much like this editorial, it is about what sort of thing the process actually is unlike most of the awful hype about Devops, Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, and Continuous Release.

I first came across continuous integration fourty five years ago when I first got involved with big complex software (previous five years had been mainly small apps and small compilers/interpreters, plus a lot of writing up design ideas and proposals and a bit of lecturing). I was very favourably impressed by how much we could achieve with the CI approach, and over the next four years enhanced some of the development tools and devised several new tools to provide better support for CI and for Continuous Validation. I have to admit, though, that the way we did things back then was something of a shambles by today's standards. Since then I have spent most of my working time in environments that used CI (often called that) and Continuous Validation (rarely called that), and more recently with Continuous Release and Continuous Delivery too (not quite continuous everything, but pretty close). So I tend to feel rather lost in an environment where thiss doesn't happen and people in different stages of the process don't communicate freely.

Tom

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736183 More actions · Answer 5

Andrew..Peterson (7/15/2016)
Steve,
I think it is great that you continually push (CP) for CI/CD and now DevOps. I setup a shop over ten years ago with CI (continuous integration) and it was great. I just do not understand why it is still not the norm. And now, it seems that they needed to come up with a new label "devops" to that an old idea was "new and fresh."
So carry on to: CP for CI/CD/DevOps!

I don't understand why VCS isn't ubiquitous, never mind the rest.

Steve Jones - SSC Editor SSC Guru Points: 736183 More actions · Answer 6

TomThomson (7/16/2016)
I very much like this editorial, it is about what sort of thing the process actually is unlike most of the awful hype about Devops, Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, and Continuous Release.

Thanks, Tom.

Must of DevOps is stuff I've been doing for 20 years as well. It's good, solid software dev and teamwork practices.

Gary Varga SSC Guru Points: 82166 More actions · Answer 7

I'd have to agree with Steve here. These are decades old practices and it is totally unprofessional to use some of them. Arguably, all of them.

Gaz

-- Stop your grinnin' and drop your linen...they're everywhere!!!