How We Work

Measured, tested, incremental — in that order.

Firebase consulting has a credibility problem: much of what is sold as "Firebase expertise" is app-agency work with a Firestore attached. Our approach is built around the parts of the platform where judgment actually matters — rules, data modeling, cost, and the boundary between Firebase and everything else.

Rules are code

Security rules are the most consequential and least tested code in most Firebase apps. We treat them as production software: version control, code review, an emulator test suite that runs in CI, and deploys that go through the same pipeline as everything else. We do not ship a ruleset without tests, including tests that prove the denials.

Measure before recommending

Cost and performance findings come from instrumentation, not intuition. Before we propose a data-model change, we can tell you what the current shape costs in reads per user session and what the proposed shape should cost. After the change, we verify against the bill. Recommendations without numbers are opinions, and you can get opinions for free.

Hybrid over dogma

We are not a "Firebase forever" shop or a "graduate to real infrastructure" shop. Firestore is the right store for some workloads and the wrong one for others, and the honest answer is usually a boundary, not a religion. When we recommend moving a workload off Firebase, the recommendation comes with the cutover plan and the verification strategy, not just the destination.

Incremental cutovers, always

Any change that touches production data ships incrementally: parallel runs, reconciliation checks, and a rollback path at every step. Big-bang migrations are how weekend incidents happen, and we do not run them.

Your repo, your ownership

We work inside your repository, your review process, and your deployment pipeline. Everything we build is documented and handed over as we go — the goal of every engagement is that your team can operate and extend the system without us. Engagements are hourly time and materials: scope, staffing, and timeline agreed through an initial conversation and revisited as the work teaches us both something.

Start with a conversation about the problem; scope and staffing follow from there.
Sound like your kind of engineering?