3 ms·

All these things have tradeoffs, but even with a kubernetes setup there is a variety ways you can configure it that will work better or worse for your workload.

by aflag 5y ago

All these things have tradeoffs, but even with a kubernetes setup there is a variety ways you can configure it that will work better or worse for your workload. Regarding being the core business, in this regard, that doesn't matter that much. You'll either pay amazon or hire your own team. In either case you'll be spending money in something that's not your "core" product. If you can replace amazon with a bespoke system for a fraction of the price and same resilience, why not? Someone have said in this thread before, managing those things is not really rocket science. You can have a small, focused team who's able to manage a lot of resources and that can and often is cheaper than outsource. Obviously, it depends in a number of factors. Whether or not it's your core business doesn't seem a decisive one.

lazide 5y ago
Most people (period) will be unable to effectively hire/build/retain a team who can competently build those associated pieces, let alone all of them necessary to operate effectively at this scale. It is why tech is hard, and remains hard, for the majority of companies, governments, etc. If something is a core part of the business, 1) it’s something they either already have a demonstrated level of competency in, or they wouldn’t be in business, and 2) efficiencies and improvements here should make them more money in a direct and measurable way, and 3) attempting to outsource it exposes them significantly to counterparty risk that can put them out of business, which is generally not considered a good thing. In some ways it’s like a factory that uses a lot of power. Should they build their own power plant or use the utility. That depends on many factors. Using the utility is often the better choice and works out better, but not always. If the quality and price of the power is a core part of what makes the company competitive, probably - and that is going to be a key factor in where the factory is located, when it operates, etc.

by aflag 5y ago

lazide 5y ago

Most people (period) will be unable to effectively hire/build/retain a team who can competently build those associated pieces, let alone all of them necessary to operate effectively at this scale. It is why tech is hard, and remains hard, for the majority of companies, governments, etc. If something is a core part of the business, 1) it’s something they either already have a demonstrated level of competency in, or they wouldn’t be in business, and 2) efficiencies and improvements here should make them more money in a direct and measurable way, and 3) attempting to outsource it exposes them significantly to counterparty risk that can put them out of business, which is generally not considered a good thing. In some ways it’s like a factory that uses a lot of power. Should they build their own power plant or use the utility. That depends on many factors. Using the utility is often the better choice and works out better, but not always. If the quality and price of the power is a core part of what makes the company competitive, probably - and that is going to be a key factor in where the factory is located, when it operates, etc.