Healthcare.gov Scales At Last

I thought it strange that HealthCare.gov was released into the wild and promptly fell flat even though a few people were able to sign up. That indicates scalability problems rather than faults in algorithms and data-structures.
“HealthCare.gov was originally planned to handle 50,000 concurrent users, and will reach that capacity by Saturday, the White House official said.
However, big spikes in traffic — such as the 200,000 who tried to get on at the same time on October 1 — would cause users to go into a queue to receive an e-mail advising them when to return, the official said.”

See White House: Enroll in Obamacare, but not too fast.

Chuckle. It’s amusing that politicians and their political machines promote something and then are surprised that the system gets overloaded. The scalability should have been there on Day One (in excess, to handle a predictable spike in clients and spammers). Perhaps the Republicans constantly nagging over the budget had something to do with that…

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Healthcare.gov Scales At Last

  1. oiaohm says:

    IGnatius T Foobar really I hope the USA is not how you describe.

    IGnatius T Foobar ObamaCare is a lot like the Australian medical system and Australia Anti- Discrimination act because its based off them.

    IGnatius T Foobar by the way ObamaCare if you follow what Obama said has been copied from the Australian system. The design of it is not from a socialist country.

    If you want socialist working Medical system go to cuba. Cuba doctors are allocated regions and are responsible for all people in there area. Say good by to Doctor choice and good by medical data privacy from government.

    IGnatius T Foobar so really what is wrong with the Australian system. Our system helps those who need it. Punish those who don’t have insurance who can afford insurance.

    Lot of companies don’t like the Australian PBS either. Part of of the requirement of a drug company getting listed on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is agreeing to allow competition to produce the drug that gets listed after so many years.

    IGnatius T Foobar if you follow Australian history back the main reason the Australian Government Medical Support systems exist is to prevent crime. Just like a person desperate for a additive drug will rob places to get money a person with sick relations can also be tempted todo the same thing.

    IGnatius T Foobar aparently from what you are describing what you call real Americans like mentally ill and sick people on the street and like the crime it causes.

    Crime is disruptive to capitalism. Yes following your stupid logic IGnatius T Foobar the police force should be disposed of as well because they are enforcing law and order and socialist governments have police.

    A good medical system is a requirement of a capitalist or socialist system. The reason for both is different. Socialist is to care for the people. Capitalist is to reduce criminal disruption and downtime due to sickness so more profit can be made that in turn can be taxed. Yes looking after peoples heath is part about making profit.

    USA is a lot of ways have been stupid on what they call Socialist so have destroyed systems that are part of a Capitalist solution.

  2. IGnatius T Foobar wrote, “Socialist Communist Freedom-Hating Marxist Hitler-like Leftoid Thugs, who think that ObamaCare and socialism are a good idea.”

    One of the strangest things about USAians is many think leaving national healthcare policy to money-grubbing insurance companies is a good thing. I though Obama was elected by the majority who figure a bit of rationality to the system would be better. Much of the world envies places like Canada with full MediCare so that farmers don’t have to balance the health of the wife against the health of a cow. Healthcare insurance is just sharing the risks of poor health so that it doesn’t bankrupt anyone. Why is that a bad idea? Why is it even socialist? It’s just good government to do the things for citizens that citizens can’t do for themselves. Getting coverage even with existing conditions or while changing employers comes to mind… It’s a real puzzle why USAians prefer a zillion insurance companies with different forms/paperwork/conditions is a good thing for the healthcare system when a single payer could just set standards and everyone would get along fine. Here, in Canada, Medicare is not even a line-item on our taxes and it works fine. Service providers need only fill out and stock a single form and about a dozen people run the whole system. I can gash my hand in the workshop and be back home sewn up and happy in an hour without filling out a single form or making a phone call. What’s wrong with that? No insurance companies need be involved at all. We, a nation, can insure ourselves. It’s all good.

  3. There are only two types of people in the United States: Real Americans, who want every last bit of ObamaCare (including Obama himself) removed from the universe, and Socialist Communist Freedom-Hating Marxist Hitler-like Leftoid Thugs, who think that ObamaCare and socialism are a good idea.

    They’re so far to the extreme left they probably think Richard Stallman is sane.

  4. dougman says:

    NSA spying be more important, then USA government provided healthcare.

    President Obama says ObamaCare is more than a website, I would add that the ObamaCare website is more than a place to find coverage – it’s a government surveillance system, the largest consolidation of personal information in the history of this country.

    So not only will you not find private insurance there, you will also find that you’re helping the government keep track of all the details of your life – from your income, to your employer, to your family, to your doctor.

  5. JD wrote, “I simply think the snafu was a result of poor coding practices / mismanagement.”

    Nope. They aimed for surviving 50K connections and fell short. They actually received 200K connections. They think they are at the point they can survive 50K and they believe 200K is still too many. That’s a matter of scaling. It’s not a coding error or they would have fixed that long ago. Mismanagement may have increased the problem but it didn’t create it. The Republicans penny-pinching may well have limited expenditures on scale. Given the situation, anyone in their right mind would have over-built and scaled back after the nature of the demand was identified. I’m surprised they didn’t put it all on Google’s cloud to make sure scale was not a problem. It’s funny that a government that can afford to spy on the whole world one person at a time cannot manage such a well-defined project.

  6. JD says:

    They would have only needed a fraction of the servers the NSA has to scale it for the world, yet with all that money they spent, I find it hard to believe they couldn’t buy a few more servers / RAM. I disagree that this is strictly a scalability problem, I simply think the snafu was a result of poor coding practices / mismanagement.

Leave a Reply