Re:The Evolution of Container Usage at Netflix
by qeternity on Friday April 21, 2017 @08:47AM
(#14165044)
Compute is cheap. People are expensive.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Evolution of Container Usage at Netflix
by dominotw on Friday April 21, 2017 @09:10AM
(#14165219)
> Compute is cheap.
Not on AWS.
Re:The Evolution of Container Usage at Netflix
by exhilaration on Friday April 21, 2017 @09:18AM
(#14165270)
Word on Hacker News is that Netflix is one of AWS' premiere showcase customers and gets discounts that we couldn't dream of.
Re:The Evolution of Container Usage at Netflix
by djb_hackernews on Friday April 21, 2017 @09:36AM
(#14165428)
If you have dynamic workloads, need to be HA, scalable and multi region, AWS is worth every cent.
If you are running a webapp and a database with a known workload, not so much.
Re:The Evolution of Container Usage at Netflix
by 1_2__3 on Friday April 21, 2017 @10:16AM
(#14165789)
The refrain of shitty developers everywhere.
Re:The Evolution of Container Usage at Netflix
by radicalbyte on Friday April 21, 2017 @11:55AM
(#14166661)
Performance has never mattered. That's why Internet Explorer's map access implementation was exponential instead of logarithmic (to the size of the map).
That one piece of lazy coding held back Javascript on their platform for years, and I'd argue that it as the most significant cause of their browser's market share plummeting (or at last tied with lack of adblockers).
Re:The Evolution of Container Usage at Netflix
by randomthoughtss on Friday April 21, 2017 @10:35AM
(#14165938)
Seems fine for server-side development. For client-side, please don't kill my battery.