3 ms·
Using "portable services" is a non-cloud pattern and a return to 2008. If you're not using managed services, i.e running your own database, backups and all - y
by TruthWillHurt 5y ago
Using "portable services" is a non-cloud pattern and a return to 2008.
If you're not using managed services, i.e running your own database, backups and all - you might as well use bare-metal.
- henrydark 5y agoNothing wrong with bare metal.
- sokoloff 5y agoBare metal has higher fixed costs (mostly people’s comp) and lower marginal unit costs (per GB RAM, per TB, per CPU-second). I think at small scale, I’d put nearly everything natively in the cloud (including every side project that has a network-connected, always on component). At extreme scale, most things should be bare metal. There’s a crossover point somewhere in the middle. For me, that crossover point is somewhere in the huge scale range.
- kaydub 5y agoThis is the way. The only places I've worked at/for as of the last 2-3 years that don't heavily rely on managed services were an absolute disaster. A lot of "not invented here" syndrome. A lot of anti-patterns and janky hacks to make things work. Currently working somewhere 100% locked in to AWS and I've never been happier.
- treve 5y agoNon-cloud pattern and 2008 are both unqualified issues. That said, RDS is great. Managed, automated backups and portable.
- yencabulator 5y agoThere's a huge gap between "we assume there's a competently run Postgres somewhere" and being vendor-locked to AWS. Former doesn't imply latter.