Google app engine was released in 2008...
Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
101–110 of 202 posts
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#102I love the test-in-production illustration. This is a fairly accurate map of my journey as well. I vividly remember scolding our customers about how they needed a staging environment that was a perfect copy of production so we could guarantee a push to prod would be perfect every time. We still have that customer but we have learned a very valuable & expensive lesson. Being able to test in production is one of the mo…
You can test in production by moving fast and breaking things (the clueless guy). You can test in production by having canaries, filters, etc, and allowing some production traffic to the version under test. This is the "wired" guy. For many backend things, you can test in production by shadowing the current services, and copying the traffic into your services under test. It has limitations, but can produce zero disru…
Until you discover that prod has an edgecase string that has the blood mother of cthulu's last name written in swahili-hebrew, (you know it as swabrew, or SHE for short) which due to a lack of goat blood on migration day is one of the ~3% of edge cases that aren't replicated and now youve got an entirly new underground civilization born that is expecting you to serve them traffic with 5 9's and you can only do 4 because of the flakiness.
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but test talks to all production business systems too I'm not sure I understand this, would you mind explaining more? Do you mean you have multi-tenancy in databases and application (the "tenants" being stage/test and prod)?
I think what op’s referring to is a staging app version that talks to production services and databases. Eg you have a “clone” of your production UI, accessible only to devs. This clone is configured to talk to the same DB and call the same dependencies as the production service but since it’s access is limited it’s used by devs to test their new feature(s). This pattern is used where I work too. It’s been incredibly…
This is how to build a scaling DoS issue that bombs prod iirc
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
what would you say is the architectural sacrifice of pushing things out to the edge, or using lambda functions per say in your opinion? There are issues about resolving state at the edge, though Cloudflare has solved some of that with durable objects, and Fastly is working on something too. Think there are memory constraints as of now however. Security too is better in these platforms at the edge - true zero trust mo…
It's similar to the issues with microservices. You've broken something that could be "simple" single monolithic application into many pieces and now there is huge complexity in how they are all joined together, fragemented state, latency, transactional integrity, data models, error handling, etc etc. Then your developers can't debug or test them properly, what used to be a simple breakpoint in the debugger and steppi…
My god you've given me hope again
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#105A trainer said to me YAML is like JSON but easier to read, he then said count the whitespace on every line...
Sure, An IDE makes it easier to see, but the same can be said about JSON.
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#106I think we assume too much about where infrastructure is headed. Serverless, containers... they're fueling this notion of increased productivity but I don't think they themselves are keeping up with where Software is headed. E.g. "AI: --- in a lot of cases you're going to be breaking through every level of abstraction with any *aaS above the physical cores and attached devices. Traditional CRUD simplified? -- sure, but I feel like these "infrastructure" dev opportunities will be eaten by digital platforms and cloud solutions in the coming years.
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#107Years and years ago I saw an advertisement by a SAN array vendor where their gimmick was that they supported very cheap read/write snapshots of very large datasets, in combination with a set of transforms such as data masking or anonymisation. Their target market was same as the OP: developers that need rapid like-for-like clones of production. The SAN could create a full VM server pool with a logical clone of hundre…
> There are few enough addresses (even in the 10.0.0.0/8 private range) that subnets have to be manually preallocated to avoid conflicts
I hate to be that guy, but it's 2021 and we should start deploying stuff on ivp6 networks to avoid this kind of problems (beside other kind of problems)...
edit: ok I just saw the PS about ipv6 and Azure... sorry.
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#108Years and years ago I saw an advertisement by a SAN array vendor where their gimmick was that they supported very cheap read/write snapshots of very large datasets, in combination with a set of transforms such as data masking or anonymisation. Their target market was same as the OP: developers that need rapid like-for-like clones of production. The SAN could create a full VM server pool with a logical clone of hundre…
Do you remember the name of the original SAN array provider?
It could be NetApp, they had a huge marketing wave 2-3 years ago. In fairness, their appliances are very good, I've seen them in action both on-prem and in the cloud (on AWS). The pricing however... They're very expensive, particularly so in the cloud (since you're paying licensing on top of cloud resources).
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Azure's network team decided to unnecessarily use NAT for IPv6, making it exactly (100%!) as complex as IPv4... People like the NAT. It's a feature, not a bug. If your selling point for IPv6 is "no more NAT" then no wonder it never went anywhere! P.S. No, "you're doing it wrong" and "you're not allowed to like the NAT" are not valid responses to user needs.
What do people like about NAT? I am guessing that the perceived increase in security. But perhaps there are more real or perceived advantages.
> What do people like about NAT?
NAT allows people to be very dumb about networking. Either you "open a port" or you don't.
It works very well as long somebody else is managing the network for you and you just ask for stuff to happen and then that somebody else has to actually make it work.
Re: Software Infrastructure 2.0: A Wishlist
#110Well written article. This exactly with this spirit - of making AWS, GCP, Azure accessible to any developer that Qovery has been built. The idea of Qovery is to build the future of the Cloud - making developers to deploy their apps on AWS in just a few seconds. No joke. 2200+ developers from 110+ countries are deploying hundreds of apps per day. And this is only the beginning. Thanks again for sharing this article.
You can give a try to Qovery here: https://www.qovery.com