4 ms·

Future coding has lead to some of the most overcomplicated systems I've worked with. It's one of the reasons (among many) I quit my last job. I was constantly t

Future coding has lead to some of the most overcomplicated systems I've worked with. It's one of the reasons (among many) I quit my last job. I was constantly told code that had no use cases was "important to have" because "we needed it".

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
scarface74 7y ago
So does that same idea apply to all of the many abstractions thst geeks do just to stay vendor or cloud agnostic just in case one day AWS/Azure go out of business?
- Impossible 7y ago
  We had platform agnostic discussions with no concrete plan or action by anyone to actually escape our platform.
- Joeri 7y ago
  On the other hand, I worked on a multi-million line codebase that was deeply joined to oracle’s db, with a team who all really wanted to move away from it but couldn’t because in the beginning (a decade earlier) the choice had been made to not put in “unnecessary” abstractions.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    It’s not about the abstractions. In the case of Oracle or any other database, if you’re only using standard SQL and not taking advantage of any Oracle specific features, why are you spending six figures a year using it? The same can be said about your cloud provider. If you’re just using it for a bunch of VMs and not taking advantage of any of the “proprietary features” what’s the purpose? You’re spending more money than just using a colo on resources and you’re not saving any money on reducing staff or moving faster. You’re always locked into your infrastructure decisions once you are at any scale. In the case of AWS for instance (only because that’s what I’m familiar with), even if you just used it to host VMs, you still have your network infrastructure (subnets, security groups, nails), user permissions, your hybrid network setup (site to site, client to site VPNs) your data etc. In either case, it’s going to be a months long project triggering project management, migrations, regression tests, and still you have risks of regressions. All of the abstractions and “repository patterns” are not going to make your transition effort seamless. Not to mention your company has spent over a decade building competencies in the peculiarities of Oracle that would be different than MySql. After a decade, no one used a single stored procedure or trigger that would be Oracle specific? Dependencies on your infrastructure always creep in.
- lmm 7y ago
  Yes. There's no point abstracting over a vendor API if you're not actually using an alternative implementation (even for testing). Otherwise, keep your code simple, and pull out an abstraction if and when you actually have a use case for doing so.
- dx034 7y ago
  Vendor agnostic code doesn't anticipate AWS going out of business, just them raising prices significantly. It can be smart to be able to switch in a reasonable amount of time so that you can evaluate the market every few years. This way spending extra time to be vendor agnostic can also pay off. But there's no technical reason for that, it's a cost issue.
  - scarface74 7y ago
    It’s often noted that in almost 15 years of existence, AWS has never increased prices on any service. What are the chances that AWS will increase prices enough to make all of the cost in developer time and complexity in “abstracting your code” and the cost in project management, development, regression tests, risks, etc make it worthwhile to migrate? The cost of one fully allocated developer+ qa+ project manager + the time taken by your network team + your auditors, etc and you’re already at $1 million. Do you also make sure that you can migrate from all of the other dozen or so dependencies that any large company has - O365? Exchange? Your HR/Payroll/Time tracking system (Workday)? Windows? Sql Server? SalesForce? Your enterprise project management system? Your travel reimbursement system (Concur), your messaging system? Your IDP (Active Directory/Okta)?

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

scarface74 7y ago

So does that same idea apply to all of the many abstractions thst geeks do just to stay vendor or cloud agnostic just in case one day AWS/Azure go out of business?

Impossible 7y ago
We had platform agnostic discussions with no concrete plan or action by anyone to actually escape our platform.
Joeri 7y ago
On the other hand, I worked on a multi-million line codebase that was deeply joined to oracle’s db, with a team who all really wanted to move away from it but couldn’t because in the beginning (a decade earlier) the choice had been made to not put in “unnecessary” abstractions.
- scarface74 7y ago
  It’s not about the abstractions. In the case of Oracle or any other database, if you’re only using standard SQL and not taking advantage of any Oracle specific features, why are you spending six figures a year using it? The same can be said about your cloud provider. If you’re just using it for a bunch of VMs and not taking advantage of any of the “proprietary features” what’s the purpose? You’re spending more money than just using a colo on resources and you’re not saving any money on reducing staff or moving faster. You’re always locked into your infrastructure decisions once you are at any scale. In the case of AWS for instance (only because that’s what I’m familiar with), even if you just used it to host VMs, you still have your network infrastructure (subnets, security groups, nails), user permissions, your hybrid network setup (site to site, client to site VPNs) your data etc. In either case, it’s going to be a months long project triggering project management, migrations, regression tests, and still you have risks of regressions. All of the abstractions and “repository patterns” are not going to make your transition effort seamless. Not to mention your company has spent over a decade building competencies in the peculiarities of Oracle that would be different than MySql. After a decade, no one used a single stored procedure or trigger that would be Oracle specific? Dependencies on your infrastructure always creep in.
lmm 7y ago
Yes. There's no point abstracting over a vendor API if you're not actually using an alternative implementation (even for testing). Otherwise, keep your code simple, and pull out an abstraction if and when you actually have a use case for doing so.
dx034 7y ago
Vendor agnostic code doesn't anticipate AWS going out of business, just them raising prices significantly. It can be smart to be able to switch in a reasonable amount of time so that you can evaluate the market every few years. This way spending extra time to be vendor agnostic can also pay off. But there's no technical reason for that, it's a cost issue.
- scarface74 7y ago
  It’s often noted that in almost 15 years of existence, AWS has never increased prices on any service. What are the chances that AWS will increase prices enough to make all of the cost in developer time and complexity in “abstracting your code” and the cost in project management, development, regression tests, risks, etc make it worthwhile to migrate? The cost of one fully allocated developer+ qa+ project manager + the time taken by your network team + your auditors, etc and you’re already at $1 million. Do you also make sure that you can migrate from all of the other dozen or so dependencies that any large company has - O365? Exchange? Your HR/Payroll/Time tracking system (Workday)? Windows? Sql Server? SalesForce? Your enterprise project management system? Your travel reimbursement system (Concur), your messaging system? Your IDP (Active Directory/Okta)?