3 ms·
Couple of notes: - This is a technique, and it's a toolset, but most importantly it's a commitment. Google could have split this up many times. In fact, this w
by DanielBMarkham 10y ago
Couple of notes:
- This is a technique, and it's a toolset, but most importantly it's a commitment. Google could have split this up many times. In fact, this would have been the "easy" thing to do. It did not. That's because this strategic investment, as long as you keep working it, keeps becoming more and more valuable the more you use it. Taking the easy way out helps today -- kills you in the long run.
- This type of work just isn't as important as regular development, it's more important than regular development, because it's the work that holds everything else together.
- In order for tests to run in any kind of reasonable amount of time, there has to be an architecture. Your pipeline is the backbone you develop in order for everybody else to work
- You can't buy this in a box. Whatever you set up is a reflection of how you evolve your thinking about how the work gets delivered. That's not a static target, and agreement and understanding is far more important than implementation. I'm not saying don't use tools, but don't do the stupid thing where you pay a lot for tools and consultants and get exactly Jack Squat. It doesn't work like that.
- qznc 10y agoThe paper does not compare or evaluate this "commitment". It is a data point that monorepo scales to 86TB provided you heavily invest in infrastructure to support it. This is significant as many would have considered that "impossible" as in "it is impossible to make git scale to 86TB". We don't know if the monorepo approach is worth it. Google believes it is (Facebook as well). Many others don't. The manyrepo approach also has advantages.
- DanielBMarkham 10y agoFTA, "...Over the years, as the investment required to continue scaling the centralized repository grew, Google leadership occasionally considered whether it would make sense to move from the monolithic model. Despite the effort required, Google repeatedly chose to stick with the central repository due to its advantages..." The article goes into detail about both benefits and drawbacks. The manyrepo approach also has advantages. Care to elaborate on any of these? (aside from the obvious "works fast on my machine")