You support a service with a well-defined Service Level Objective (SLO). Over the previous 6 months, your service has consistently met its SLO and customer satisfaction has been consistently high…

Question

Options

• AMake the service's SLO more strict.
• BIncrease the service's deployment velocity and/or risk.
• CShift engineering time to other services that need more reliability.
• DGet the product team to prioritize reliability work over new features.
• EChange the implementation of your Service Level Indicators (SLIs) to increase coverage.

• A
  10% (3)
• B
  83% (25)
• D
  3% (1)
• E
  3% (1)

Explanation

When a service consistently meets its SLO and has healthy error budget remaining, SRE best practices say the team should spend that budget to maximize organizational value rather than hoarding reliability. Option B (increase deployment velocity and/or risk) directly applies the SRE principle: unspent error budget represents missed opportunities for feature velocity and experimentation. If reliability is high, the team can afford to move faster. Option C (shift engineering time to other services) is also correct - a well-automated, highly reliable service does not need the same engineering attention as a struggling one. Moving SRE capacity to services with worse reliability ratios provides more organizational benefit. Option A (stricter SLO) is wrong because the current SLO is confirmed appropriate. Option D (prioritize reliability over features) is the opposite of what SRE prescribes when error budget is healthy. Option E (change SLI implementation) is not warranted given the service is already well-measured and performing well.

No community discussion yet for this question.