Upgrade to Pro
— share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …
Speaker Deck
Features
Speaker Deck
PRO
Sign in
Sign up for free
Search
Search
MOM! My algorithms SUCK
Search
Abe Stanway
September 19, 2013
Programming
15
2.7k
MOM! My algorithms SUCK
Given at Monitorama.eu 2013 in Berlin.
http://vimeo.com/75183236
Abe Stanway
September 19, 2013
Tweet
Share
More Decks by Abe Stanway
See All by Abe Stanway
Building Data Driven Organizations
astanway
1
200
A Deep Dive into Monitoring with Skyline
astanway
6
1.8k
Bring the Noise: Continuously Deploying Under a Hailstorm of Metrics
astanway
34
7.8k
Data Visualization in the Trenches
astanway
5
660
Gifs as Language
astanway
2
730
Your API is a Product
astanway
3
920
Zen and the Art of Writing Commit Logs
astanway
3
760
Other Decks in Programming
See All in Programming
NSOutlineView何もわからん:( 前編 / I Don't Understand About NSOutlineView :( Pt. 1
usagimaru
0
150
Snowflake x dbtで作るセキュアでアジャイルなデータ基盤
tsoshiro
2
430
WEBエンジニア向けAI活用入門
sutetotanuki
0
300
詳細解説! ArrayListの仕組みと実装
yujisoftware
0
480
Kaigi on Rails 2024 - Rails APIモードのためのシンプルで効果的なCSRF対策 / kaigionrails-2024-csrf
corocn
5
3.4k
CSC305 Lecture 13
javiergs
PRO
0
130
Googleのテストサイズを活用したテスト環境の構築
toms74209200
0
270
Boost Performance and Developer Productivity with Jakarta EE 11
ivargrimstad
0
860
Vue SFCのtemplateでTypeScriptの型を活用しよう
tsukkee
3
1.5k
役立つログに取り組もう
irof
26
8.7k
アジャイルを支えるテストアーキテクチャ設計/Test Architecting for Agile
goyoki
7
2.8k
推し活としてのrails new/oshikatsu_ha_iizo
sakahukamaki
3
1.7k
Featured
See All Featured
Six Lessons from altMBA
skipperchong
26
3.5k
The World Runs on Bad Software
bkeepers
PRO
65
11k
How to Think Like a Performance Engineer
csswizardry
19
1.1k
[Rails World 2023 - Day 1 Closing Keynote] - The Magic of Rails
eileencodes
32
1.8k
Speed Design
sergeychernyshev
24
570
jQuery: Nuts, Bolts and Bling
dougneiner
61
7.5k
The Art of Delivering Value - GDevCon NA Keynote
reverentgeek
7
150
Become a Pro
speakerdeck
PRO
24
5k
How GitHub (no longer) Works
holman
311
140k
[RailsConf 2023] Rails as a piece of cake
palkan
51
4.9k
The Myth of the Modular Monolith - Day 2 Keynote - Rails World 2024
eileencodes
14
1.9k
Fight the Zombie Pattern Library - RWD Summit 2016
marcelosomers
231
17k
Transcript
@abestanway MOM! my algorithms SUCK
i know how to fix monitoring once and for all.
a real human physically staring at a single metric 24/7
that human will then alert a sleeping engineer when her
metric does something weird
Boom. Perfect Monitoring™.
this works because humans are excellent visual pattern matchers* *there
are, of course, many advanced statistical applications where signal cannot be determined from noise just by looking at the data.
can we teach software to be as good at simple
anomaly detection as humans are?
let’s explore.
anomalies = not “normal”
humans can tell what “normal” is by just looking at
a timeseries.
“if a datapoint is not within reasonable bounds, more or
less, of what usually happens, it’s an anomaly” the human definition:
there are real statistics that describe what we mentally approximate
None
“what usually happens” the mean
“more or less” the standard deviation
“reasonable bounds” 3σ
so, in math speak, a metric is anomalous if the
absolute value of latest datapoint is over three standard deviations above the mean
we have essentially derived statistical process control.
pioneered in the 1920s. heavily used in industrial engineering for
quality control on assembly lines.
traditional control charts specification limits
grounded in exchangeability past = future
needs to be stationary
produced by independent random variables, with well- defined expected values
this allows for statistical inference
in other words, you need good lookin’ timeseries for this
to work.
normal distribution: a more concise definition of good lookin’ μ
34.1% 13.6% 2.1% 34.1% 13.6% μ - σ 2.1%
if you’ve got a normal distribution, chances are you’ve got
an exchangeable, stationary series produced by independent random variables
99.7% fall under 3σ
μ 34.1% 13.6% 2.1% 34.1% 13.6% 2.1% μ - σ
if your datapoint is in here, it’s an anomaly.
when only .3% lie above 3σ...
...you get a high signal to noise ratio...
...where “signal” indicates a fundmental state change, as opposed to
a random, improbable variation.
a fundamental state change in the process means a different
probability distribution function that describes the process
determining when probability distribution function shifts have occurred, as early
as possible. anomaly detection:
μ 1
μ 1 a new PDF that describes a new process
drilling holes sawing boards forging steel
snapped drill bit teeth missing on table saw steel, like,
melted
processes with well planned expected values that only suffer small,
random deviances when working properly...
...and massive “deviances”, aka, probability function shifts, when working improperly.
the bad news:
server infrastructures aren’t like assembly lines
systems are active participants in their own design
processes don’t have well defined expected values
they aren’t produced by genuinely independent random variables.
large variance does not necessarily indicate poor quality
they have seasonality
skewed distributions! less than 99.73% of all values lie within
3σ, so breaching 3σ is not necessarily bad 3σ possibly normal range
the dirty secret: using SPC-based algorithms results in lots and
lots of false positives, and probably lots of false negatives as well
no way to retroactively find the false negatives short of
combing with human eyes!
how do we combat this?* *warning! ideas!
we could always use custom fit models...
...after all, as long as the *errors* from the model
are normally distributed, we can use 3σ
Parameters are cool! a pretty decent forecast based on an
artisanal handcrafted model
but fitting models is hard, even by hand.
possible to implement a class of ML algorithms that determine
models based on distribution of errors, using Q-Q plots
Q-Q plots can also be used to determine if the
PDF has changed, although hard to do with limited sample size
consenus: throw lots of different models at a series, hope
it all shakes out.
[yes] [yes] [no] [no] [yes] [yes] = anomaly!
of course, if your models are all SPC-based, this doesn’t
really get you anywhere
use exponentially weighted moving averages to adapt faster
fourier transforms to detect seasonality
second order anomalies: is the series “anomalously anomalous”?
...this is all very hard.
so, we can either change what we expect of monitoring...
...and treat it as a way of building noisy situational
awareness, not absolute directives (alerts)...
...or we can change what we expect out of engineering...
...and construct strict specifications and expected values of all metrics.
neither are going to happen.
so we have to crack this algorithm nut.
...ugh. @abestanway