lmickh

Interesting test, but I find some of these benchmarks kind of miss the point. Even Grafana's.

The appeal of Thanos/Cortex/Mimir is the long term object storage. The value isn't that it is simpler or cheaper to run. The value is that I can compare data to months if not years ago. It can cost much more than the price of the instances to store good metrics over time even when the data is rolled up.

Scaling the read/write path separately has a lot of benefits as well too, but I would guess that doesn't come up often for most folks.

How much telemetry you can get in/out of your system over a day is important, but how much you can get in/out of it over years is overlooked.

I wouldn't go so far as to say there wasn't much purpose for the ground troops in the context of the goal of eliminating Iraqi military capabilities. It involved some of the largest tank battles in US history such as the Battle of Norfolk and the Battle of the 73 Easting. While we look back at some of these as a steam roll in hindsight, the truth is the engagements were larger than most of the armor battles in WW2 involving the US.

The marine advancement in to Kuwait that was part of a larger multi-national push that much of the Iraqi forces were running from. The push by 1st Inf Div, 2nd ACR, and others on the west was to cut off that retreat.

Combat theaters are large and it is never a good idea to take a narrow view of them and generalize it to the whole. The father of my childhood friend used to tell us how his deployment in Vietnam as an MP was some of the best time in his life. He spent his entire time on a post relatively far from the fighting largely killing his time trying to surf and eat BBQ.

Casualties in warfare is typically used to measure the lose of the fighting force. Not only does it include killed and wounded, it typically also includes troops lost to disease and starvation.

It is pretty common for people to misinterpret casualties as deaths. Especially when people who are not familiar with the terms try to repeat the information to others.

There is also the common practice of not including discounts in revenue. There is a reason companies talk about revenue instead of net sales or net income.

I've never seen AWS give discounts comparable to what Azure provided. Especially to larger companies they want the brand recognition from.

Hundreds of developers were moved from Azure teams to the GitHub org about a year or so ago. Several new features they have added are effectively rebranding/built on top of other Azure projects.

GitHub is hardly at arms length from MS.

If you think the game was a disappointment, doesn't that imply you already gave them the money? It is not a service. If you bought it 5 years ago, you don't have to pay more to play it.

CNN and 24hr cable news has not been good for journalism. Opinion pundits responding to events before the facts can even be collected along with daily shows interweaving narratives pre-dates Fox News. Fox News played their game more blatantly ruthless than the others and beat them at their own game.

Burke Libbey has a few talks that are available on YouTube including a presentation at NixCon about the work he is doing at Shopify. I would highly recommend checking them out if you are interested in Nix.

You use the language to define the configuration, packages, and etc. NixOS isn't so much an OS configured by a package manager as much as it is an OS + package manager that you can configure with the Nix language.

Then there is also lot of tooling to hid all of the symlink magic. It is very deep rabbit hole. Most of the quick touch examples will basically look like magic.

It is pretty easy to be confused. Especially since it is also a language yet all the other replies at the time have writing have failed to mention that.

While I like the project as a whole, their naming is horrible. Just wait until you get into `nix-env` vs `nix-shell` etc...

I like how it pretty much just glosses over decades of familiarity. If there is anything the last 20 years prove, it is that the majority of developers will stick with what they know over what might be a good fit for the job. It goes even deeper in the SQL world down to the specific database flavor.

From the ops side I actually find RDBMS more difficult to deal with cause the power of relationships is easy to abuse and they are not anti-fragile. Instead of smartly reasoning about the data, it is all to easy to just "JOIN ALL THE THINGS WITH MEGA TEMP TABLES!". I've taken more database outages from bad queries then anything else.

There are bad implementations on both sides. There are reasons to pick both sides over the other given a set a circumstances. At the end of the day, the technical facts don't matter to most people's decision making though.

IIRC, it was on the order of $100k+ per cluster for the Premium offering. Has been several months so I would suggest contacting them to see what it currently is.

For some projects I've been on, that wouldn't be a big deal. For smaller projects it can easily be several times your opex though.

You can run an open source cluster in HA without it though. The big draw for Enterprise is the multi-cluster and HSM support. Anything HSM is typically quite expensive so their pricing really isn't out of line.

Maybe that was poor wording on my part, but ease of use in combination with the features are important.

Take the database secret backend for example. Getting that same feature out of other simple systems, would be a lot of work. Audit trails are another low effort high reward feature. When you start to get into combining those features, it is an even greater pay off. When you start to take into consideration HA clusters...well if you want to put that together on your own have at it.

Much of "easiest" has to do with familiarity as well. I've seen new users get Vault up in minutes that still don't have GPG setup "cause it is hard". If you are already working with DynamoDB or Consul, you already know how to setup the storage. Those are common skills. I'm sure there are folks that fall on the other side of that use GPG often, but it doesn't make either side more objectively easy.

If you only have the need for a simple system, then Vault may be overkill. I would say Vault is comparable to Kubernetes. Does everyone need it: No. Simpler stuff can be done with config management or tools like Nomad. Does it have features that most people will eventually want to use: Absolutely.

Secret management is one of those things were simple solutions end up easily becoming more and more involved just like container orchestration. Especially when you get into chicken/egg scenarios regarding stuff like some of the tools you mentioned.

Side note: I've tried at least 12 other tools for this purpose , and I would recommend Vault over all of them for most every scenario that is more involved then "Use 1Password".

Yes. I use Terraform to pull secrets from Vault and insert them into Kubernetes secrets so that there is a single source of truth.

You can use json as well, but it is pretty unfriendly for the human users and you lose some of the interpolation.