4 ms·
> I tried it a while ago (more than 1yr ago) and was taken aback by the number of AWS constructs it uses. I wasn't sure what all it was creating on the backend
by philsnow 4y ago
> I tried it a while ago (more than 1yr ago) and was taken aback by the number of AWS constructs it uses. I wasn't sure what all it was creating on the backend and what the impact of those constructs on the product's recurring billing would be.
This is common for AWS sales demos. In this case there are cost externalities, but I'm more used to caring about authn/authz externalities, where the flashy demo makes you think "it's so easy" but then you get into the nitty-gritty of making sure that whatever thing is safe to deploy in a production environment.
You have to dive very deep into AWS docs and forum posts (hopefully, but less likely if it's a newer AWS product) to find all the ways to limit access to the thing and especially by the thing, especially since so many AWS demos come with IAM policies that are littered with asterisks.
- vivegi 4y agoTrue that. I found it a better bet to use Infra-as-Code and defining everything from the ground up (in the AWS ecosystem, AWS-CDK works well for IaC). It takes some time, but at least we know fully well what constructs are explicitly instantiated and how the dependencies evolve.