Live data from Hacker News

Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

cep.dev

171–180 of 644 posts

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#172
post #91

> EKS My contrarian view is that EC2 + ASG is so pleasant to use. It’s just conceptually simple: I launch an image into an ASG, and configure my autoscale policies. There are very few things to worry about. On the other hand, using k8s has always been a big deal. We built a whole team to manage k8s. We introduce dozens of concepts of k8s or spend person-years on “platform engineering” to hide k8s concepts. We publish…

K8S is a disastrous complexity bomb. You need millions upon millions of lines of code just to build a usable platform. Securing Kubernetes is a nightmare. And lock-in never really went away because it's all coupled with cloud specific stuff anyway. Many of the core concepts of Kubernetes should be taken to build a new alternative without all the footguns. Security should be baked in, not an afterthought when you need…

Millions upon millions of lines of code?! What? Can you specify what you were trying to do with it?

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#173

> 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…

Some orgs are looking at moving back to on prem because they're figuring this out. For a while it was vogue to go from capex to opex costs, and C suite people were incentivized to do that via comp structures, hence "digital transformation" ie: migration to public cloud infrastructure. Now, those same orgs are realizing that renting computers actually costs more than owning them, when you're utilizing them to a signif…

That’s made possible because of all the orchestration platforms such as Kubernetes being standardized, and as such you can get pretty close to a cloud experience while having all your infrastructure on-premise.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#174

> 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…

RDS pricing is deranged at the scales I've seen too. $60k/year for something I could run on just a slice of one of my on-prem $20k servers. This is something we would have run 10s of. $600k/year operational against sub-$100k capital cost pays DBAs, backups, etc with money to spare. Sure, maybe if you are some sort of SaaS with a need for a small single DB, that also needs to be resilient, backed up, rock solid bullet…

> Sure, maybe if you are some sort of SaaS with a need for a small single DB, that also needs to be resilient, backed up, rock solid bulletproof.. it makes sense? But how many cases are there of this?

Very small businesses with phone apps or web apps are often using it. There are cheaper options of course, but when there is no "prem" and there are 1-5 employees then it doesn't make much sense to hire for infra. You outsource all digital work to an agency who sets you up a cloud account so you have ownership, but they do all software dev and infra work.

> If its so fundamental to your product and needs such uptime & redundancy, what are the odds its also reasonably small?

Small businesses again, some of my clients could probably run off a Pentium 4 from 2008, but due to nature of the org and agency engagement it often needs to live in the cloud somewhere.

I am constantly beating the drum to reduce costs and use as little infra as needed though, so in a sense I agree, but the engagement is what it is.

Additionally, everyone wants to believe they will need to hyperscale, so even medium scale businesses over-provision and some agencies are happen to do that for them as they profit off the margin.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#175

So by and large I agree with the things in this article. It's interesting that the points I disagree with the author on are all SaaS products: > Moving off JIRA onto linear I don't get the hype. Linear is fine and all but I constantly find things I either can't or don't know how to do. How do I make different ticket types with different sets of fields? No clue. > Not using Terraform Cloud No Regrets I generally recom…

Why gitlab? GitHub actions are a mess but gitlab online's ci cd is not much better at all, and for self hosted it opens a whole different can of worms. At least with GitHub actions you have a plugin ecosystem that makes the super janky underlying platform a bit more bearable.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely--I recommend this after you've reached the point where you're writing huge checks to AWS. Maybe this is just assumed but I've never seen anyone else add that nuance to the "just use RDS" advice. It's always just "RDS is worth it" full stop, as in this article.

I mean, just use supabase instead. So much easier than RDS. Why even deal with AWS directly? Might as well have a Colo if you need AWS.

[dead]

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of cases. It doesn't even have to be a tiny database. Within Also, Aurora gives you the block level cluster that you can't deploy on your own - it's way easier to work with than the usual replication.

Once you commit to more deeply Amazon flavored parts of AWS like Aurora, aren't you now fairly committed to hoping your scale never exceeds the cost-benefit tradeoff?

If my scale exceeds the cost benefit tradeoff, then I will thank God/Allah/Buddah/Spaghetti Monster.

These questions always sound flawed to me. It's like asking won't I regret moving to California and paying high taxes once I start making millions of dollars? Maybe? But that's an amazing problem to have and one that I may be much better equipped to solve.

If you are small, RDS is much cheaper, and many company killing events, such as not testing your backups are solved. If you are big and you can afford a 60K/yr RDS bill than you can make changes to move on-prem. Or you can open up excel and do the math if your margins are meaningfully affected by moving on-prem.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most people who’ve never experienced native NVMe for a DB are also unaware of just how blindingly fast it is. Even io2 Block Express isn’t the same.

Yes. We have it 4x striped on those same machines. Burns like lightning.

I have one of those. It’s so fast I don’t even know what to do with it.

Re: Almost every infrastructure decision I endorse or regret

#179
post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a lot of startups have a set of requirements that is something like: - I want to spin up multiple redundant instances of some set of services - I want to load balance over those services - I want some form of rolling deploy so that I don’t have downtime when I deploy - I want some form of declarative infrastructure, not click-ops Given these requirements, I can’t think of an alternative to managed k8s that is…

A startup with no DBA does not need redundant anything. Too small.

Uh? Even some larger startups don't have DBAs anymore. For better or for worse. Hell even the place I currently work in, which is not a startup at all has basically no DBA role to speak of.
Post reply on HN