Skip to main content

Continuous Delivery: Decouple release from deployment

For most organizations releasing and deploying are the same thing while in fact these are 2 separate things:

  • Deployment: A technical handling where a new version of the software is deployed to a specific environment
  • Release: A business handling where the customers are informed that a new version of the software is available and can be used

As you combine these 2 handlings in one, releasing becomes a risky business. The same moment you roll out the code on production, your users are eagerly waiting to start using these new features they so desperately needed.  At that moment, you don’t want that things go wrong.

So what do most organizations do? They introduce long release cycles where an application has to go through multiple environments and test cycles before finally reaching production.And they try to reduce the risk by only going through this cycle one or 2 times a year.

But while they are thinking that this limit the risk, it actually has an opposite effect. The moment Murphy kicks in (and it will) you’re into trouble. Why? Because you have to go step by step through this really long release cycle again before you can apply your patch or hot fix to production. By then this fix is not so ‘hot’ any more. And in the meanwhile error reports keep coming in…

Now this is the theory, what I see in practice (a lot!), is that when there is really something wrong on production, the whole process is thrown out of the window and the solution is deployed immediately  to production. Wooops, maybe not the best idea either?!

Could there be a better solution?

Of course! Otherwise I shouldn’t be writing this blog post. First of all, let these 2 handlings(deployment and release) remain separate things. Deploy your feature to production as soon it’s ready but hide it from the users. Later on, you can do a ‘release’ and enable the feature on production just by toggling a configuration switch. Even better is that you can gradually enable a feature for a subset of your users. The moment you notice that performance is going down or exceptions start appear, you can easily disable the feature again and fix it without impacting the users. This is exactly the approach that companies like Facebook and Amazon are using.

Now one important recommendation I want to make is to go one step further and split out the deployment itself in multiple steps:

  • In step 1, you deploy your database changes. No code changes are deployed yet. Of course this means that database changes should happen in a non breaking fashion. For example, if you add a new required database column, make it nullable first or provide a sensible default.
  • In step 2, deploy your application change.  When you’re ready announce the release and enable the feature.
  • If everything is working as expected, you can continue to the last (optional) step and update the database again. For example, for the new column you created before, you can now make it not nullable and remove the default value.

This provides a fault tolerant approach in handling releases and is a first step towards continuous delivery.

Popular posts from this blog

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...

Cache stampede: when our cache turned against us

While investigating some performance issues, we ran into an ASP.NET Core API that cached a fairly expensive aggregation query for 60 seconds. Under normal load, that was fine: one request rebuilds the cache, everyone else reads from it. Under peak load, dozens of requests would arrive in that same expiry window, all see a cache miss, and all fire the same expensive query in parallel. The database didn't like that. That was the moment when our caching layer stopped helping and started hurting. A burst of requests comes in at the same time, all miss the cache, and all go hammer the database or the downstream API at once. That's a cache stampede . The cache was supposed to protect our backend, and for a few hundred milliseconds it did the opposite. Why this happens IMemoryCache.GetOrCreate (and its async sibling) looks like it protects you, but it doesn't add any locking on its own. Look at the naive version: public async Task<Report> GetReportAsync(string key) ...

Azure DevOps/ GitHub emoji

I’m really bad at remembering emoji’s. So here is cheat sheet with all emoji’s that can be used in tools that support the github emoji markdown markup: All credits go to rcaviers who created this list.