Chevron Left
Back to Site Reliability Engineering: Measuring and Managing Reliability

Learner Reviews & Feedback for Site Reliability Engineering: Measuring and Managing Reliability by Google Cloud

4.5
stars
443 ratings
135 reviews

About the Course

This course teaches the theory of Service Level Objectives (SLOs), a principled way of describing and measuring the desired reliability of a service. Upon completion, learners should be able to apply these principles to develop the first SLOs for services they are familiar with in their own organizations. Learners will also learn how to use Service Level Indicators (SLIs) to quantify reliability and Error Budgets to drive business decisions around engineering for greater reliability. The learner will understand the components of a meaningful SLI and walk through the process of developing SLIs and SLOs for an example service....

Top reviews

EY

Apr 22, 2020

The course itself was great. It was a bit upsetting to see that many of the assignments submitted by our peers are mostly copy and paste from the lectures or direct copies from the examples...

PM

Jun 23, 2020

SRE is not 100% technical course like other cloud services ( VM Instances, Storage , Compute ...etc) . It is very well designed and explained . Very very interactive and thought provoking

Filter by:

101 - 125 of 135 Reviews for Site Reliability Engineering: Measuring and Managing Reliability

By Duraivel G

Jun 02, 2020

liked the peer reviews, discussions and practical assesments

By Forrest X

Apr 16, 2020

Hope the SLI/SLO samples could cover more secenarios.

By Kumara S G

Apr 29, 2020

Too Simplified explanation

By Jayaram P

Sep 25, 2019

Excellent study Containt

By Shilpa A

Jan 28, 2020

Very Useful

By Sangeetha N A

Jan 22, 2020

Good one

By William M

Oct 21, 2019

The video content was a good introduction to the topic. The graded assessments did make me think in more depth about the issues, but the instructions for them could have been clearer. For some of the assessments (particularly in week 3), I think it might have been helpful to give more detail about how to devise SLIs for a different scenario beforehand, it wasn't until I saw the sample answer after doing the assessment that I really understood what the course wanted. There did seem to be some bugs in the course, such as repeated identical questions in week 4.

By Melissa J K

Jan 31, 2020

Five-star content. One-star functionality for enterprise users: (1) If your company has a strong firewall, you won't be able to share the main assignment (a Google spreadsheet). It must instead be submitted from your laptop or other home computer—big hassle. (2) The peer grading process is cumbersome, slow, and random. (3) The Week 4 discussion prompts marked "Optional" are not optional—you don't get credit for having finished the preceding section until you enter a response in the discussion window.

By Keisuke K

Feb 24, 2020

It was an excellent course for beginner like me because I could understand the basic concepts, such as SLI, SLO, error budget, and documentation. However, I felt a massive gap between the lectures and assignments: the assignments, not quiz, were challenging due to the lack of guides, and the peer-to-peer reviews were not working well. It would be great if there were more steps in assignments.

By Dickon S

Apr 05, 2020

One of the presenters spoke really quickly and I found it hard to follow. I am a native English speaker and so was he, so it wasn't a language issue, I just felt he was racing through the materials. Overall a good course, but could be better and I loved the subject matter.

By Jeffrey J M

Nov 26, 2019

The ratio of instruction to assignment work was not great. It seemed that after every 15-30 minutes of instruction, we were expected to complete a 2-hour assignment and then grade each other. I took this course so that I would not have to be self-taught! You know?

By Anita S

Dec 23, 2019

Course content and delivery was excellent! The peer review process could use some improvement..had to chase reviewers via discussion forums, ran into one reviewer who didn't read the response before grading leading. It was a distraction in the learning process.

By Jesse S

Oct 24, 2019

Some of the content is a little disjointed and the exercises need while well thought out individually don't flow together very well (jump around between scenarios). I also didn't really think the first week was as high quality as 2-4.

By Jacques S

Oct 31, 2019

A big topic to cover in one course. I would suggest covering a little mare material and extra exercises over a longer period. Thank you for the opportunity to learn though.

By Ronald C

Feb 10, 2020

While the content itself is good and relevant, the presentation and speakers are too robotic and the module layout of the course doesn't match the weekly schedules.

By Akshay S

Feb 28, 2020

The course is designed for people knowing some basic. The beginner level introductory course should be made available before this course

By Sergey L

Oct 29, 2019

This allows to establish the universal language between teams and set up common goals, but the practical part is not very solid.

By Sibaprasad T

Jan 09, 2020

The course could have been more interactive. Sometimes it felt like the trainers are just reading from the material in front!!

By Jeannene S

Sep 04, 2019

Issues with test no working to get the answer addressed not responding to title in the project you need to turn in .

By Srinivasan M

May 12, 2019

Dependency on people is not very good as we end chasing people for review

Overall course structure is good

By Nuutti R

Feb 15, 2019

Flashback from Lost. Some of the materials and assingments seemed out of sync.

By Pavle V

Apr 07, 2019

Not well structured peer-graded assignments.

By James

Feb 23, 2020

I agree with another reviewer on here (ASHISH) in that it would have been beneficial to have some practice examples for the submission tests. Not knowing the "grading rubric" ahead of time as to get an idea of what the course was looking for, sort of left you writing something up, submit, see what the grading-rubric looked like, then edit (which blows away any feedback you received from peers) and start again.

The last user submission (which required a spreadsheet to be downloaded), updated with info you analyzed in previous submissions, and then needs to be "publicly" shared out from your personal Google account to be publicly reviewed by other users. Two things from this take-away:

1) put in more "specific" instructions on how to proceed (I reviewed several other users, and it was clear they did not understand what was required. I commented back to several with line-by-line instructions to help where I could).

2) Instead of requiring me to us my personal GMail account (if you have another way to publicly share the spreadsheet, that can be used as well), have some way to host it on the Coursera site.

By Doug R

Oct 14, 2019

Content was good, but there are a lot of things that could have been done better about the Coursera website.

All content was presented through video. Although the transcript was provided, it was just a big block of text. It was almost impossible to look up a key point. It would have been good for the class to provide TEXT summaries of the key points at the end of each lesson.

The videos were also extremely dense and dry. Again, a text summary would have helped immensely.

The content of weeks 1-3 were good, but I wasn't very impressed with week 4.

On one of the written assignments I accidentally refreshed the page, causing me to lose all of my work. I'm taking off one star for this. If you are going to give us large assignments, then you need to have an auto-save.

I wasn't impressed with the week 3 assignment. I was mostly fighting with the spreadsheet instead of focusing on the concepts of the course.

By Dennis H

Oct 16, 2019

While the concepts presented in the course are valuable and important, the way they are presented is extremely dry and difficult to follow. I would not be surprised if both the text and videos (besides the intro videos with 2 people) were all AI-generated. Concepts that could be explained easily are presented as they'd be in an academic paper. You're better off reading the transcription over and over rather than watching the videos.