4 ms·
i disagree, not much more then 2 servers.. you should automate it fully for documentation purposes alone at this scale & test failover regulary if you do this
by magicCat 3y ago
i disagree, not much more then 2 servers.. you should automate it fully for documentation purposes alone at this scale & test failover regulary
if you do this with 4 or 200 machines, does not make a big difference.
- di4na 3y agoActually it does because the chance of hitting strange edge cases grow significantly, as do the runtime of your deployment, plus networking problems risks.
- manmal 3y agoRunning 200 servers will force you to automate everything and also handle (relatively) rare edge cases, meaning added complexity, huge up front dev costs, and a continuous dev effort just to stay afloat. Work has to be balanced in a clever way, making tradeoffs that you otherwise wouldn't need to make. The mental model shifts from individual servers to a whole ecosystem that shows emergent behavior (= things break in a totally new way). Maybe some of that also applies to 4 servers, but to a way lesser extent.