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

MiniStack (replacement for LocalStack)

ministack.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: MiniStack (replacement for LocalStack)

#81

Post by justinsaccount »

arpinum wrote: post #46

I have detailed knowledge of dynamodb. This code does not properly mimic the service exceptions, input validations, eventual consistency, or edge cases. I would not feel comfortable developing against ministack or running tests against it. A lot of these services also have free tiers, so the use cases are quite minimal.

I ran into the same thing with Kinesis. The Kinesis API has strict limits on batch size, message size, and rate limiting. Any client writing to Kinesis must deal with all of these constraints and handle errors properly.

I briefly looked at localstack to see how they implemented the Kenesis api and other than a `KINESIS_ERROR_PROBABILITY` option to simulate rate limiting, they did not implement any of the constraints.

Re: MiniStack (replacement for LocalStack)

#82

Post by nnucera »

justinsaccount wrote: post #81
arpinum wrote: post #46

I have detailed knowledge of dynamodb. This code does not properly mimic the service exceptions, input validations, eventual consistency, or edge cases. I would not feel comfortable developing against ministack or running tests against it. A lot of these services also have free tiers, so the use cases are quite minimal.

I ran into the same thing with Kinesis. The Kinesis API has strict limits on batch size, message size, and rate limiting. Any client writing to Kinesis must deal with all of these constraints and handle errors properly. I briefly looked at localstack to see how they implemented the Kenesis api and other than a `KINESIS_ERROR_PROBABILITY` option to simulate rate limiting, they did not implement any of the constraints.

Thanks for pointing this, I am adding a few extra validations in v 18 (to be released in a few hours) feel free to raise an issue, this is an open source project but I do review each PR and I keep the code as clean as I can... And yes we do use AI but we know what we are doing :)

Re: MiniStack (replacement for LocalStack)

#83

Post by nnucera »

Oxodao wrote: post #80
ksh09 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thoughts on https://github.com/hectorvent/floci ?

two weeks old project that already emulates 20+ services from AWS that's suspicious (tbf ministack is even worse in that matter)

Feel free to raise an issue at https://github.com/nahuel990/ministack if any of our emulated services don't work...

Re: MiniStack (replacement for LocalStack)

#84

Post by mastercomputer »

switchbak wrote: post #9
staticassertion wrote: post #6

I really don't see how any clone is going to manage to do what localstack couldn't - maintain compatibility with tons of AWS services while not getting paid for it. If this were viable, why would it not have worked before? The only things I can think of are that perhaps LocalStack was just a mess of a codebase that couldn't maintain velocity or attract contributors, or it just failed to steward new contributors or so…

"LocalStack was just a mess of a codebase" - very true. I do think there's potential to semi-automatically create a compatible suite of services, but it'll require some very talented use of LLMs and some novel testing approaches. Not something I want to sign up for. I evaluated Floci, but that has the typical issues you'd expected with freshly minted vibe code.

What are the typical problems you mentioned with Floci? I just went into their repo, and the community is very active; I see a lot of contributions. I'm not sure what you mean by typical problems.

Re: MiniStack (replacement for LocalStack)

#86

Post by lucas_vieira »

mikeocool wrote: post #17
staticassertion wrote: post #6

I really don't see how any clone is going to manage to do what localstack couldn't - maintain compatibility with tons of AWS services while not getting paid for it. If this were viable, why would it not have worked before? The only things I can think of are that perhaps LocalStack was just a mess of a codebase that couldn't maintain velocity or attract contributors, or it just failed to steward new contributors or so…

Personally, I would get value out of really solid compatibility of the base features of a few core services (sqs, s3, kms, and maybe dynamo are the main ones that come to mind) with a light weight gui interface and persistence. If I’m getting into esoteric features or some “big” features that don’t make sense locally, then I just spin up a real dev account of aws, so I know I’m getting the real experience.

This is exactly the approach fakecloud takes — depth over breadth. 13 services right now, but each one is conformance tested against the AWS Smithy API models (34,856 test variants). The bet is that fewer services with correct behavior is more useful for integration testing than broad coverage that surprises you in production.

Re: MiniStack (replacement for LocalStack)

#87

Post by lucas_vieira »

justincormack wrote: post #53
hrmtst93837 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I am currently implementing S3, with correct error handling for edge cases. Its been about a month and I have almost the whole API surface done, with some gaps (you actually need a broader surface eg some IAM, KMS encrytion needs a persistence layer so only done sse-c so far). Close to the point where you could drop it in as a local emulation tool, its a sub 9MB binary (Rust). Literally as I write this the AI code re…

[dead]
Post reply on HN