Skip to main content

Digilasku osa 4

Digilasku on tehty täysin asiakkaan toiveiden mukaiseksi. Saimme asiakkaalta listan halutuista ominaisuuksista jotka priorisoimme. Lähdimme implementoimaan järjestelmää hyvin lyhyen (varmaankin noin kahden tunnin) suunnittelun jälkeen. Tarkoituksena oli scrum-tyyliin demota järjestelmää usein ja hakea siten lopullista muotoa.

Homma ei aivan haluamallamme tavalla sujunut. Kesälomien takia pääsimme näyttämään järjestelmää vain muutaman kerran kolmen kuukauden aikana. Tämä vaikutti järjestelmään varmasti paljon. Käyttäjäpalautteen puutteen takia jouduimme arvailemaan toteutuksessa jonkin verran. Jotkut arvauksista osui oikeaan, toiset väärään.

Käyttäjäkokemusten puuttuessa, teimme järjestelmän sisään oman osion, jossa käyttäjä voi kertoa parannusehdotuksista ja bugeista käytön ohessa. Tästä on ollut huomattavaa hyötyä, sillä olemme saaneet tätä kautta merkittävän osan bugiraporteista ja parannusehdotuksista. Asiakkaan mukaan kynnys yhteydenottoon on merkittävästi pienempi, koska raportointi aiheuttaa vain vähän lisävaivaa. Vaikka osa raporteista on ollut hieman lyhyitä, ovat ne parempia kuin ei mitään.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I'm not a passionate developer

A family friend of mine is an airlane pilot. A dream job for most, right? As a child, I certainly thought so. Now that I can have grown-up talks with him, I have discovered a more accurate description of his profession. He says that the truth about the job is that it is boring. To me, that is not that surprising. Airplanes are cool and all, but when you are in the middle of the Atlantic sitting next to the colleague you have been talking to past five years, how stimulating can that be? When he says the job is boring, it is not a bad kind of boring. It is a very specific boring. The "boring" you would want as a passenger. Uneventful.  Yet, he loves his job. According to him, an experienced pilot is most pleased when each and every tiny thing in the flight plan - goes according to plan. Passengers in the cabin of an expert pilot sit in the comfort of not even noticing who is flying. As someone employed in a field where being boring is not exactly in high demand, this sounds pro...

PydanticAI + evals + LiteLLM pipeline

I gave a tech talk at a Python meetup titled "Overengineering an LLM pipeline". It's based on my experiences of building production-grade stuff with LLMs I'm not sure how overengineered it actually turned out. Experimental would be a better term as it is using PydanticAI graphs library, which is in its very early stages as of writing this, although arguably already better than some of the pipeline libraries. Anyway, here is a link to it. It is a CLI poker app where you play one hand against an LLM. The LLM (theoretically) gets better with a self-correcting mechanism based on the evaluation score from another LLM. It uses the annotated past games as an additional context to potentially improve its decision-making. https://github.com/juho-y/archipylago-poker

Careful with externalTrafficPolicy

On a project I am working on is hosted in an EKS cluster with the NGINX ingress controller (the one maintained by Kubernetes). It is deployed using it's official official Helm chart, which I realized, after a lengthy debugging session, was a mistake. The initial setup I aimed to improve had several flaws. Firstly, we were using the AWS Classic Load Balancer in front of the nginx ingress in the cluster, which has been deprecated for some time (years?). Continuing to use it makes little sense to us. The second issue was that we were only running one(!) nginx pod, which is quite sketchy since the exposed web services had essentially no high availability.  I switched to the Network Load Balancer (NLB), which was straightforward - I just needed to change the ingress-nginx service annotation to specify the load balancer type as NLB: service.beta.kubernetes.io/aws-load-balancer-type: nlb However, increasing the replica count turned out to be tricky. When I bumped it up to two, I began to ...