Chaos engineering setup

Chaos engineering setup is the introduction of a practice of controlled experiments on resilience: we formulate hypotheses ('if the database goes down — the site should show a fallback, not collapse'), safely inject managed failures (disabling a dependency, network delays, node failure, load), observe the behavior and record what broke. We start on staging/a limited scope and only then, carefully, move closer to production. Honestly about the role, this is key: chaos engineering is a tool for DETECTING weak spots, NOT eliminating them: the experiment shows the system handles a failure poorly, but fixing what is found (redundancy, timeouts, retry, graceful degradation) is separate engineering work. Honestly about the prerequisite, this is critical: chaos engineering is for MATURE infrastructure. You need working backups, monitoring, clear recovery and at least basic fault tolerance. On a fragile project without these, injecting failures will itself turn into a real outage — so if the foundation is missing, we will honestly say 'too early' and recommend backups/DR (770) and monitoring first. Honestly about risk: even a careful experiment carries a risk of impacting real users — so we strictly control the blast radius, start small, have a 'kill switch' and a rollback. Honestly about practice: this is not a one-off 'broke it once' setup, but a regular discipline — the value is in repeatability. Honestly about the result: you get a list of real weak spots and priorities; the value materializes only if you fix something based on the findings. Honestly about access: access to the infrastructure and risk approval are needed. An important boundary: this is chaos engineering (testing resilience through failures), while backups/DR themselves are 770 and monitoring is separate. Picture this: instead of 'we hope it holds on a failure' — you know in advance exactly what will break and have time to fix it. The base price starts from 30,000 ₽; it depends on infrastructure maturity and the scope of experiments.

• It is unknown how the system will behave on a real failure.
• 'Fault tolerance' exists on paper, but no one has tested it.
• Outages reveal weak spots suddenly and at the worst moment.
• No practice of regular resilience testing.

• Assessing infrastructure maturity (whether it is ready for chaos at all)
• Formulating resilience hypotheses
• Safe controlled failures (with blast-radius limitation)
• A 'kill switch' and fast experiment rollback
• Recording weak spots and priorities
• Indicating boundaries (detection, not fixing; maturity needed)
• Starting on staging, careful approach to production
• Handing over findings and review with you

• It is visible what will really break on a failure — in advance
• Resilience weak spots found before an outage
• A practice of tested, not paper, fault tolerance
• A priority list for fixing (the fixing itself — separate)

• We assess infrastructure maturity; if too early — we say so honestly and recommend a foundation
• We formulate hypotheses, inject controlled failures on staging
• We record findings, carefully approach production, review with you

• Won't this bring our site down?

  There is always a risk of impact — so we work strictly controlled: we start on staging, tightly limit the blast radius, keep a 'kill switch' and a rollback. And most importantly: chaos engineering is appropriate only on mature infrastructure with backups and monitoring. If the foundation is missing — we will honestly say it is too early and will not risk your production.

• Will the system become resilient after the experiments?

  The experiments themselves do one thing — they SHOW weak spots. The system becomes more resilient only if you fix something based on the findings (redundancy, timeouts, graceful degradation) — that is separate engineering work. Honestly: chaos engineering is diagnostics under load, not an automatic cure.

• Do we even need this?

  Not everyone does. Chaos engineering is justified for mature projects where downtime is costly and there are already backups, monitoring and basic fault tolerance. For a small or simple site it is premature — the foundation first (backups/DR, monitoring). We will honestly assess your situation and will not sell a practice you do not need yet.