4 ms·
Even with cloud specific technologies still have to option to use locally running alternatives for development with a little abstraction. Unless your core busi
by tams 6y ago
Even with cloud specific technologies still have to option to use locally running alternatives for development with a little abstraction.
Unless your core business specifically targets the capabilities of chosen cloud specific tech, you can get away with developing on a supplemental solution and rely on CI plus staging environments to uncover and fix the edge cases that you miss this way.
This is especially true with low-level stuff like databases and queues. I've worked like this for years and never had to worry much about it.
- qayxc 6y agoAgreed - containers and VMs have made this approach even simpler these days. Mainframes on the other hand are next to impossible to get in hardware and pretty much useless when emulated (what good is Hercules if you still can't get z/OS or VSE for it?).
- luma 6y agoIf you're going to run alternatives to cloud services and call that good enough, then the same is also true for mainframe development. Meaning, I can't run DynamoDB locally but PostgreSQL is close enough for most tasks, so sure I can kinda run that workload locally, but I won't learn any implementation-specific issues about how it would behave in AWS. Similarly, I might have a hard time running DB2 for Z/OS, but I can also run it on Windows or Linux, and in this case I'm far closer to the actual development environment. Same is true for most of the dev tools and services commonly found in Z series environments. I would argue the commenter above you is flat-out wrong: for most core AWS and Azure services, it's far easier to put together a home, single-desktop-PC-based dev environment for mainframe than it would be for cloud if you don't have the ability to actually use the cloud directly.