3 ms·
> I've never seen one get burned by self-hosting. Then, I have no idea where your neck of the woods is, but that’s crazy. If I had a nickel for every company
by gjsman-1000 2y ago
> I've never seen one get burned by self-hosting.
Then, I have no idea where your neck of the woods is, but that’s crazy.
If I had a nickel for every company that self-hosted but didn’t update in time, or self-hosted but had a flawed backup strategy, or self-hosted and hit scaling problems, or self-hosted and suffered a natural disaster, or self-hosted and experienced theft, I would be a millionaire.
- JohnFen 2y agoLet me clarify -- by "get burned", I mean "suffered serious data loss or loss of services for a meaningful amount of time". I didn't mean "have some sort of problem". Regardless of whether you self-host or not, you're going to have problems. Just different ones, depending on which way you go.
- TheNewsIsHere 2y agoQuite right. A lack of functional backups isn’t a self-hosted problem, it’s an implementation problem. Plenty of SaaS companies out there variously 1) don’t have backups; 2) conflate backup and sync; 3) don’t test backups; or 4) have perfectly functional and tested backups that cover a level that isn’t useful if a single customer needs a restore. And all of that could well be the case in any self-hosted environment too. Bad design, lazy or incomplete implementation, and good old fashioned negligence is at home and well in both SaaS and self-hosted shops the world over. At least with self-hosted you can be either consummately diligent, entirely negligent, or somewhere in between all by yourself.