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

Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

cep.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 644 posts

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#361

Post by matwood »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #164
jacurtis wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly agreed with OP's article, but you basically nailed all of the points of disagreement I did have. Jira: Its overhyped and overpriced. Most HATE jira. I guess I don't care enough. I've never met a ticket system that I loved. Jira is fine. Its overly complex sure. But once you set it up, you don't need to change it very often. I don't love it, I don't hate it. No one ever got fired for choosing Jira, so it gets…

I'm right there with you on Jira. The haters are wrong - it's a decent enough ticket system, no worse than anything else I've used. You can definitely torture Jira into something horrible, but that's not Jira's fault. Bad managers will ruin any ticket system if they have the customization tools to do so.

Yeah, usually Jira hate is really convoluted company process hate. Of course the Jira software isn't perfect, but it's fine. Jira's strength and weakness is it's flexibility.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#362

Post by mschuster91 »

Spivak wrote: post #208
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't my experience at all. Maybe three or four years ago? Who exactly needs millions of lines of code?

I think they're more getting a k8s requiring a whole mess of 3rd party code to actually be useful when bringing it to prod. For EKS you end up having coredns, fluentbit, secrets store, external dns, aws ebs csi controller, aws k8s cni, etc. And in the end it's hard to say if you've actually gained anything except now this different code manages your AWS resources like you were doing with CF or terraform.

We have all of that neatly extracted into a Terraform module. Write it once and now EKS clusters are essentially disposable.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#363

Post by brightball »

davedx wrote: post #267

Utter insanity. So much cost and complexity, and for what? Startups don’t think about costs or runway anymore, all they care about is “modern infrastructure”. The argument for RDS seems to be “we can’t automate backups”. What on earth?

There are other providers with better value for service within AWS or GCP, like Crunchy.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#364

Post by dfgdfg34545456 »

electroly wrote: post #6

> The markup cost of using RDS (or any managed database) is worth it. Every so often I price out RDS to replace our colocated SQL Server cluster and it's so unrealistically expensive that I just have to laugh. It's absurdly far beyond what I'd be willing to pay. The markup is enough to pay for the colocation rack, the AWS Direct Connects, the servers, the SAN, the SQL Server licenses, the maintenance contracts, and a…

For big companies such as banks this cost comparison is not as straight forward. They have whole data centres just sitting there for disaster recovery. They periodically do switchovers to test DR. All of this expense goes away when they migrate to cloud.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#365

Post by lysecret »

morsecodist wrote: post #131

> Picking AWS over Google Cloud I know this is an unpopular opinion but I think google cloud is amazing compared to AWS. I use google cloud run and it works like a dream. I have never found an easier way to get a docker container running in the cloud. The services all have sensible names, there are fewer more important services compared to the mess of AWS services, and the UI is more intuitive. The only downside I ha…

Also much prefer GCP but gotta say their support is hot steaming **. I wasted so much time for absolutely nothing with them.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#366

Post by lysecret »

erostrate wrote: post #322

The author leads infrastructure at Cresta. Cresta is a customer service automation company. His first point is about how happy he is to have picked AWS and their human-based customer service, versus Google's robot-based customer service. I'm not saying there's anything wrong, and I'm oversimplifying a bit, but I still find this amusing.

Haha very good catch. I prefer GCP but I will admit any day of the week that their support is bad. Makes sense that they would value good support highly.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#369

Post by AtNightWeCode »

electroly wrote: post #6

> The markup cost of using RDS (or any managed database) is worth it. Every so often I price out RDS to replace our colocated SQL Server cluster and it's so unrealistically expensive that I just have to laugh. It's absurdly far beyond what I'd be willing to pay. The markup is enough to pay for the colocation rack, the AWS Direct Connects, the servers, the SAN, the SQL Server licenses, the maintenance contracts, and a…

In your case it sounds more viable to move to VMs instead of RDS, which some cloud providers also recommend.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#370

Post by marcinzm »

morsecodist wrote: post #131

> Picking AWS over Google Cloud I know this is an unpopular opinion but I think google cloud is amazing compared to AWS. I use google cloud run and it works like a dream. I have never found an easier way to get a docker container running in the cloud. The services all have sensible names, there are fewer more important services compared to the mess of AWS services, and the UI is more intuitive. The only downside I ha…

GCP support is atrocious. I've worked at one of their largest clients and we literally had to get executives into the loop (on both sides) to get things done sometimes. Multiple times they broke some functionality we depended on (one time they fixed it weeks later except it was still broken) or gave us bad advice that cost a lot of money (which they at least refunded if we did all the paperwork to document it). It was so bad that my team viewed even contacting GCP as an impediment and distraction to actually solving a problem they caused.

I also worked at a smaller company using GCP. GCP refused to do a small quota increase (which AWS just does via a web form) unless I got on a call with my sales representative and listened to a 30 minute upsell pitch.

Post reply on HN