4 ms·
Sure, if your infrastructure landscape is describable statically, that's how it should be done. Most scenarios nowadays are _not_ like that anymore. There isn'
by diarrhea 3y ago
Sure, if your infrastructure landscape is describable statically, that's how it should be done.
Most scenarios nowadays are _not_ like that anymore. There isn't 5 servers next door, there's 300 serverless whatevers half a globe away. Are you going to have 300 list entries, 230 of which nigh identical but 70 subtly different? Trivial in code, almost impossible to express statically.
- XorNot 3y agoWhat you're describing though is a configuration variability which would be expressable by a static tagging regime - still simple. If your configuration is getting more complex then that though, again, it's not really configuration anymore - it's a management application which needs to be developed and treated like that. And why it's that complicated should be re-evaluated - i.e. how come this is "configuration" and not something the application detects for itself? Why is it being surfaced to the user (operator) at all?