3 ms·

Lambdas trade developer experience for operational simplicity. And they suit use cases where they are independent from each other and can be tested in isolatio

Lambdas trade developer experience for operational simplicity. And they suit use cases where they are independent from each other and can be tested in isolation eg transcoding. In the early days of AWS Lambda I saw teams trying to apply older techniques to lambdas and get stuck with things like distributed transactions but industry has learnt a lot since then. So as always right tool for the right job.

hinkley 3y ago
If it doesn’t work for the developers, then eventually it won’t work for anybody. Trading developer experience for just about anything does not scale - up or down. It’s a false economy.
- threeseed 3y ago
  And if it can’t scale and run reliably in production then it won’t work at all. Writing some code and throwing it over the fence to some Ops person to manage is not workable long term. It’s why DevOps exist because developers have to take some responsibility for operating their own code. And Lambda architectures help with this.
  - hinkley 3y ago
    This whole conversation isn’t about using Lambda. It’s about using an exorbitant amount of lambda. Which means you’re using it to the exclusion of other things. Once a project is segregated to this degree, invariably discovery has gone out the window. You have a couple of people who really understood the system and little hope of replacing or duplicating them. It’s just another form of job security. Ignore Kernighan and make a system even you barely understand.
- alex_lav 3y ago
  > Trading developer experience for just about anything does not scale - up or down. Statements made confidently while also being totally untrue.
  - zaphirplane 3y ago
    Nothing to do with the interaction above. Hacker news is like that, the person you reply to could be between the person that invented and built the tech discussed or a kid replying quickly before going to do their chores. Always fun to see either way
  - hinkley 3y ago
    That line is companion to the previous: > If it doesn’t work for the developers, then eventually it won’t work for anybody. Don’t conflate technical challenge with logistical challenge. Picking between two algorithms for condensing data is technically challenging. Picking between a solution that is transparent and one that is opaque are not the same kind of challenging. As an old mentor used to say, “I hate the term ‘tech debt’. This [situation] isn’t tech debt, it’s wear and tear.” Opaque is magic. Hiring people who understand it is expensive. Building people who understand it is part luck and part patience. And the opportunity costs, which we almost never account for, let alone properly, are one of the biggest consequences. What else could you do with that time and, more importantly, energy?

hinkley 3y ago

If it doesn’t work for the developers, then eventually it won’t work for anybody. Trading developer experience for just about anything does not scale - up or down. It’s a false economy.

threeseed 3y ago
And if it can’t scale and run reliably in production then it won’t work at all. Writing some code and throwing it over the fence to some Ops person to manage is not workable long term. It’s why DevOps exist because developers have to take some responsibility for operating their own code. And Lambda architectures help with this.
- hinkley 3y ago
  This whole conversation isn’t about using Lambda. It’s about using an exorbitant amount of lambda. Which means you’re using it to the exclusion of other things. Once a project is segregated to this degree, invariably discovery has gone out the window. You have a couple of people who really understood the system and little hope of replacing or duplicating them. It’s just another form of job security. Ignore Kernighan and make a system even you barely understand.
alex_lav 3y ago
> Trading developer experience for just about anything does not scale - up or down. Statements made confidently while also being totally untrue.
- zaphirplane 3y ago
  Nothing to do with the interaction above. Hacker news is like that, the person you reply to could be between the person that invented and built the tech discussed or a kid replying quickly before going to do their chores. Always fun to see either way
- hinkley 3y ago
  That line is companion to the previous: > If it doesn’t work for the developers, then eventually it won’t work for anybody. Don’t conflate technical challenge with logistical challenge. Picking between two algorithms for condensing data is technically challenging. Picking between a solution that is transparent and one that is opaque are not the same kind of challenging. As an old mentor used to say, “I hate the term ‘tech debt’. This [situation] isn’t tech debt, it’s wear and tear.” Opaque is magic. Hiring people who understand it is expensive. Building people who understand it is part luck and part patience. And the opportunity costs, which we almost never account for, let alone properly, are one of the biggest consequences. What else could you do with that time and, more importantly, energy?