this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
1464 points (99.5% liked)

Programmer Humor

32483 readers
320 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It was to talk about "team restructuring"

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MrPoopyButthole@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yup, if your solution is not cloud agnostic you've fucked up.

[–] severien@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Being cloud-agnostic also means additional cost/complexity.

Sometimes the only way to win the game is by not playing it.

[–] MrPoopyButthole@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would argue that most cloud native services existed in their standalone forms way before public clouds made their own versions. For example there are loads of message queue systems that are just as easy to incorporate and are cloud agnostic, some of them are FOSS. Sure you can reinvent the wheel but in most cases something like RabbitMQ will work OK depending on the use case. Having cloud vendor lock in is where cost catches up with you. Complexity is arbitrary since there are ways to make anything overcomplicated.

[–] severien@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

RabbitMQ is more expensive on AWS than e.g. SNS/SQS. It's not a coincidence, you're trading lock-in for a cheaper price.

The increased complexity comes from the fact you will need some components which exist in either managed, but vendor lock-in form, or you need to spin them up / managed yourself.

[–] MrPoopyButthole@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Right, paying for managed services whether cloud native or not is pretty much the same thing, it hurts in the pocket. Spinning up your own RabbitMQ on a VM is both cheap and cloud agnostic, especially if sized right.