3 ms·
Absolutely. I think the parent poster is massively overgeneralizing that CloudWatch is only good for "hobbyist users". Nearly every product I've worked on that'
by chrisfosterelli 8y ago
Absolutely. I think the parent poster is massively overgeneralizing that CloudWatch is only good for "hobbyist users". Nearly every product I've worked on that's utilized AWS has sent to CloudWatch, because unless they have special needs CloudWatch doesn't meet then you might as well use it because nearly every AWS product and docs are already sending their logs there by default and it's one less infrastructure company to keep track of.
- gregw2 8y agoI have been super-unsatisfied with the status quo of Cloudwatch; it is not a production grade logging system if it allows you to keep zillions of streams in logs but provides A) no way to search through them all to find the last time you had a certain error containing a certain string (grep -r -i on EFS plain text logs is better than Cloudwatch!), and B) no way to trend specific errors/issues over time. It does seem like as of last week's announcement they are starting to try to fix this. I was annoyed we had to log stuff to both Cloudwatch and Splunk to try to get decent logging.
- tracker1 8y agoHave to agree... I generally log to line separated json for logging, and what CloudWatch does offer for this works out really well for the times I've used it. TBH, for small/personal projects, I'm more likely to use, and have used dokku on Digital Ocean. About the only thing I don't like doing is managing my own DB server... so I'm really happy to see DO expanding into this space. For applications and services, dokku gets me where I need to be with the least fuss. I know if anything took off it would mean some pain, but I'll take that when/if it ever happened.