Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

roguelazer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 648 posts

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#281

Post by empath75 »

mvanga wrote: post #133

This is one weird comment section. There are people attacking the author for a statement made about CoreOS, and for some hate towards Kubernetes. The key point of the article is not really being addressed here: vested interests from large companies are able to introduce huge complexity into simple, well-designed projects. While the complexity may be good for some end that said vested interest has in mind, they are al…

The simple version of etcd still exists. Nobody deleted the code. Just use that.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#282

Post by ninkendo »

dnr wrote: post #215
tannhaeuser wrote: post #33

> HTTP/2 a.k.a. SPDY is a comically bloated Layer 4/5/7 mega-combo protocol designed to replace HTTP. It takes something simple and (most importantly!) comprehensible and debuggable for junior programmers and replaces it with an insanely over-complicated system that requires tens of thousands of lines of code to implement the most minimal version of, but which slightly reduces page load time and server costs once you…

The misconception is the idea that anyone can easily implement a compliant HTTP 1.1 server, or even client. The protocol may appear simple on paper but parsing it correctly and securely is quite tricky. IMO, one of the benefits of HTTP 2 and 3 is they force people to use libraries and remove the illusion that interacting with HTTP bytes on the wire is a reasonable thing to do.

> IMO, one of the benefits of HTTP 2 and 3 is they force people to use libraries

What a strange comment. "The benefit of this protocol is that it's so complex that nobody understands it, so they have to use an existing implementation."

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#283

Post by dstroot »

dynamite-ready wrote: post #153
mvanga wrote: post #133

This is one weird comment section. There are people attacking the author for a statement made about CoreOS, and for some hate towards Kubernetes. The key point of the article is not really being addressed here: vested interests from large companies are able to introduce huge complexity into simple, well-designed projects. While the complexity may be good for some end that said vested interest has in mind, they are al…

Agreed. I saw it as a general lament against over-engineering. I don't think the point got lost in the super specific example... You could just as easily level similar rants against the likes of React and it's wider ecosystem, Tensorflow, Typescript (many will disagree), Docker... I'm sure others have their own bugbears. Much of this is subjective, of course. But to me, it feels like software development is trending…

>Agreed. I saw it as a general lament against over-engineering. I don't think the point got lost in the super specific example...

Redis also comes to mind.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#284

Post by halbritt »

acje wrote: post #252
mvanga wrote: post #133

This is one weird comment section. There are people attacking the author for a statement made about CoreOS, and for some hate towards Kubernetes. The key point of the article is not really being addressed here: vested interests from large companies are able to introduce huge complexity into simple, well-designed projects. While the complexity may be good for some end that said vested interest has in mind, they are al…

I love k8s, think it’s the best thing that happened to distributed computing since .. sliced bread? Anyway, it’s good, but I don’t disagree with the author I just have a different perspective. I see k8s as a vehicle for learning about distributed computing not just for me but the industry as a whole. Same thing about Linux, it’s just a stepping stone for node management and has served us well in figuring out a bunch…

I also love k8s and agree with the author.

K8s gives us declarative infrastructure with eventual reconciliation. That's massive, and there's nothing else around that really does that.

I have a hard time taking anyone sesriously that makes the case that k8s is bad that hasn't fully grokked the above.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#285

Post by santoshalper »

mvanga wrote: post #133

This is one weird comment section. There are people attacking the author for a statement made about CoreOS, and for some hate towards Kubernetes. The key point of the article is not really being addressed here: vested interests from large companies are able to introduce huge complexity into simple, well-designed projects. While the complexity may be good for some end that said vested interest has in mind, they are al…

I don't get it, isn't that the point of open source and free software, why doesn't the author, or a group of like minded people simply fork the old software and release a SimpleEtcD?

Of course, you could argue that the people who made it more complicated in the first place could/should have forked instead of taking over, but that ship obviously sailed a long time ago.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#286

Post by jupp0r »

etcd switching to grpc makes complete sense. The author seems to have limited experience with the downsides of http long polling and all the implementation and operational complexities it comes with.

As a counter example of Xooglers making things more complicated, I wanted to bring forward the removal of the protobuf exposure format for prometheus 2.0 after it was discovered that it's actually more performant to parse prometheus' text format.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#288

Post by markus_zhang »

munchbunny wrote: post #249
IggleSniggle wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TypeScript is a funny one. I love the language, but at the same time, I totally agree with the premise that it is unnecessary complexity! And yet I swear by it. I can't explain why there's not more cognitive dissonance there. JavaScript taught me to love async, then functional programming, and TypeScript taught to me to love static types. I'm now desperately wishing for a world of OCaml/Haskell, but where are you goi…

You choose the tool chain to fit the anticipated team. If that team is just you, then who cares? Pick the easiest thing for you. But if you’re an expert in the tool chain and you anticipate new people hopping on, then the on-boarding process should definitely be one of your considerations. The argument for simpler tool chains for simpler projects is that the time it takes to on-board should not outweigh the time save…

Yeah exactly, and we can also pick the features we need in a language. E.g. C++ is super complex after C++/11, but we can still just pick a small subset to make it easier.

Re: Etcd, or, why modern software makes me sad

#289

Post by lemmsjid »

mvanga wrote: post #133

This is one weird comment section. There are people attacking the author for a statement made about CoreOS, and for some hate towards Kubernetes. The key point of the article is not really being addressed here: vested interests from large companies are able to introduce huge complexity into simple, well-designed projects. While the complexity may be good for some end that said vested interest has in mind, they are al…

The problem, I think, is that the article presents all of its views as almost self evidently true. If you distill it down, the complaint is that etcd added gRPC.

I think it was a good move for an infrastructure piece like etcd to add gRPC. Now I can just grab a generated client in a language of my choice. There's certainly valid critiques of gRPC / protocol buffers but I've found things like gRPC and Thrift to reduce complexity in applications that use them, because there's a thousand interpretations of REST out there, not to mention the crazy things people do with 'simple' HTTP, such as long polling, which introduce implicitly complex semantics into something that is on the surface quite simple.

Post reply on HN