Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: depends
Technologies: Python, Pipelines/Jenkins/Ansible, SQL, window/Linux Administration,Containers/Orchestration
Resume: On request
Email: pooji2695@gmail.com
Site Reliability Engineer with deep expertise in observability, incident response, and production resilience across large scale distributed systems.
Proven in reducing MTTR, hardening SLAs, and building monitoring, alerting, and automation using cloud native stacks.
Focused on reliability engineering, cost efficiency, and high availability in Azure, GCP, AWS, Kubernetes, and modern DevOps environments.
Look for startups that have recently secured funding. Startups that have recently raised funds may have a bit more stability than those that are still trying to secure their first round of funding. You can look for news articles or press releases about funding rounds to find out which startups have recently raised money.
Check out startup databases. There are several databases that track startups and provide information about their funding, team, and products. Some popular ones include Crunchbase, AngelList, and CB Insights. These platforms allow you to search for startups based on various criteria such as industry, funding stage, and location.
Attend industry events and conferences. Industry events and conferences are great places to meet founders and employees of mid-stage startups. You can network with them and learn more about their company culture and opportunities. Some popular events and conferences for startups include TechCrunch Disrupt, Startup Grind, and Collision.
Recently went to India, there is lot of changes to the roads and lane system is being followed on highways as far I have seen, this is in Hyderabad. One of the major causes for these accidents are drunk and drive but now it's changing with hefty fines.
Because if you rate 1 star that is going to their annual performance, it is very stressful job to work at aws support, in an year you would have to be get 4.8 overall rating which is very hard to get because for the most part customers doesn't rate when they had good experience.
When I worked in aws, this is primarily used to check for permissions of an object. I know how dumb customers can be, for the most part this is used to see why a customer cannot delete a bucket or object those sort of things. I don't remember having ability to see actual customers data only metadata is accessible.
Edit: Based on what I know, I'm pretty sure support will not be able see any of the customers data.
Or how broken is the tooling for IAM + S3 + other services (for example Athena and Glue).
Several times I had to explain to support that we do not want s3:* anywhere in our infra because they insisted that is the easiest solution so they do not need to waste their precious (paid by us) time on figuring out which exact permission is missing that I as a customer have no way of figuring out.
Many of us working on cloud infra for 10+ years and we still struggle some times to set up especially new services.
I really like how you conclude that this is somehow the customer's fault. I find it entertaining how the decent support staff of amazon admits that the tooling is subpar, because they got a different system internally to check out why S3 throwing a 403. As a customer we do not have anything just the API.
And no, this is not because the customers are dumb. I can't wait the moment when AWS has to actually compete with other cloud providers because this arrogance has to go.
This. The tooling and error messaging around IAM is inconsistent and lacking. I’ve even seen AWS support be completely wrong about why IAM is denying something, so I am guessing their internal tooling isn’t much better.
I caught on the fact that they have much more finely grained logging than the users do (e.g. underlying specific access denied errors which are covered by a generic one users get), and sometimes report what they see there, with no consideration on the effect on the users. You can sometimes get some details on how the services work underneath.
It happened several times with Glue mentioned by the user two replies above (usually schema registry which requires *s in resource element of the policies to work).
Maybe a more constructive way to look at this would be that people simply do "dumb" things. In customer support where you only see those moments, it might not always seem that way, but dealing with people's simple mistakes is also educating them to do better next time.
People can be ignorant, lazy, not give a shit about the work they are doing, have poor learning ability and or skills, and cross their fingers, mashing buttons, hoping everything just works, and then expect everyone else around them to help them out of their screw ups.
If you've ever worked in CS, or known anyone that works in CS, you know that there are an absolute fucking shitload of these people. Often in roles they are unqualified for and with privileges and power no sane person would ever give them.
That's true. It's also true that AWS's IAM system is pretty complex and not incredibly well designed. AWS internally makes mistakes with it with some regularity.
I find this insulting as a customer. Is AWS usually contemptuous of its customers?
I don't think I've ever called my customer "dumb", and working as a consultant I've seen all kinds of interesting things.
People make mistakes. They're always in a hurry. They may have a hard time understanding ambiguous, complex or incomplete documentation. The interface may be confusing and lead them to bad solutions. Come on, support is there to help.
>I find this insulting as a customer. Is AWS usually contemptuous of its customers?
Oh come off it. We've all seen the idiotic things that "users" can do. Someone complains something isn't working. Then you go through the steps to see what they have done, and you think "why would you ever do that?" We've all been there, and if you haven't been there then you just haven't had much interaction with "users".
I've had many AWS support engineers (and higher engineers) look at things in our env and say "I've never seen that before" and have no clue what was happening. It's a two way street. Everybody can't know everything. And remember that many devs in the real world have much broader domains than AWS engineers - I have to know every nuance about 30 AWS services, as well as my own applications and my own domain. An AWS engineer would be limited to having a deep understanding of one or a few services, and has internal experts on individual services to reach out to when they don't have some information. But sometimes even AWS devs might not be aware of a little line in the Lambda docs like "Background processes or callbacks that were initiated by your Lambda function and did not complete when the function ended resume if Lambda reuses the execution environment. Make sure that any background processes or callbacks in your code are complete before the code exits." [1] There are gotchas like this with every service, and missing a single line within the novella of docs AWS provides for each service is not a significant failing. There are also issues and concerns that are completely undocumented and are only learned with experience.
As a developer for a SaaS, I have to spend some time on support every day, including for devs who have refused to read our documentation for a particular service we provide (and the only one these devs use). It's frustrating, I know. You should assume that the developers who are your customers are unlikely to be stupid, and are instead just not informed about something or haven't read the docs (maybe they didn't know where to look, or like many, they are too busy to justify spending a day reading the docs for lambda). Best thing to do is direct them to the relevant parts of the documentation and do your best to help those people.
I am not an expert in AWS, but I have been using it for far too many years and am intimate with a number of workarounds for common problems(fuck you cloudformation).
But, I have sent off helpdesk requests for things that turn out to be me being very stupid.
As a customer, I don’t take it as an insult, we all can (as per gp) be dumb on occasion, without actually being dumb in general. On the other hand, the comment did not offer much assurance with regards to the topic at hand either.
This sort of personal attack is unwarranted and extremely unfair. AWS is renowned for it's byzantine and ever-changing and expanding nature, to the point it's outright practically impossible to know extremely basic things such as what are you paying for and how much you are paying.
