3 ms·

Same here. We have several clients who got moved to Postgres from a randomly selected unfit technology. Funny thing is with things like Solr you can build a rea

Same here. We have several clients who got moved to Postgres from a randomly selected unfit technology. Funny thing is with things like Solr you can build a really fast search index as well on the top of doing ACID transactions in the db. This covers almost every aspect of data engineering. There is obviously the scaling limit with Postgres but most of our clients are in the single db instance range by the size of their data.

eropple 9y ago
Yup yup. Our consistent advice to clients: - By the time you reach the limits of a Postgres setup, you will either be making so much money that porting it is a couch-cushions deal or your company is a smoking crater in a hillside. - SPAs are fine. SPAs plus server rendering is often a pain in the rear. Walk, then run. - If you can't express concretely why you want a container fleet, you don't want a container fleet. Your cloud provider's autoscaling will suffice. (This advice is different for non-cloud clients, but the overhead of leaving space in a container fleet for new deploys or for scaling is deadweight and turning around a container in thirty seconds is probably not as important as the blogs you read tell you it is.)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- collyw 9y ago
  > If you can't express concretely why you want a container fleet, you don't want a container fleet. I think this applies to most relatively new (hype cycle) technologies.
  - eropple 9y ago
    It does, but relatively few of those technologies have the desperate money being shoveled into their marketing in the way that containers in particular (and non-RDBMS datastores, to a lesser extent) have. So those tend to get called out explicitly because no, unless you are profoundly out of the ordinary, you don't need a hot new Kubernetes cluster on day one.
    - StreamBright 9y ago
      Exactly. I have seen this container hype exploding in recent years. A quick example: I worked for a stratup who spends ~60% of their AWS budget of operating Kubernetes and roughly ~40% on their own services. I asked their chief IT guy why is that and he could not justify it with anything other than Kubernetes is cool.

eropple 9y ago

Yup yup. Our consistent advice to clients: - By the time you reach the limits of a Postgres setup, you will either be making so much money that porting it is a couch-cushions deal or your company is a smoking crater in a hillside. - SPAs are fine. SPAs plus server rendering is often a pain in the rear. Walk, then run. - If you can't express concretely why you want a container fleet, you don't want a container fleet. Your cloud provider's autoscaling will suffice. (This advice is different for non-cloud clients, but the overhead of leaving space in a container fleet for new deploys or for scaling is deadweight and turning around a container in thirty seconds is probably not as important as the blogs you read tell you it is.)

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
collyw 9y ago
> If you can't express concretely why you want a container fleet, you don't want a container fleet. I think this applies to most relatively new (hype cycle) technologies.
- eropple 9y ago
  It does, but relatively few of those technologies have the desperate money being shoveled into their marketing in the way that containers in particular (and non-RDBMS datastores, to a lesser extent) have. So those tend to get called out explicitly because no, unless you are profoundly out of the ordinary, you don't need a hot new Kubernetes cluster on day one.
  - StreamBright 9y ago
    Exactly. I have seen this container hype exploding in recent years. A quick example: I worked for a stratup who spends ~60% of their AWS budget of operating Kubernetes and roughly ~40% on their own services. I asked their chief IT guy why is that and he could not justify it with anything other than Kubernetes is cool.