On 2/10/24 19:54, Phil Smith III wrote:
Bob Bridges wrote:
"...where mainframes' resilience meets the agility of cloud computing."
What is the "agility" of the cloud, exactly?
The ability to spin up more instances [of applications that are built that way,
obviously] on demand/automatically. For certain very peaky workloads this is a
huge win. Not that I'm in any way arguing that these are important applications
in the real world, but things like Pinterest and Instagram at least started
this way in AWS or GCP, still use the model (albeit presumably on their own
cloud now): when something big happens and usage blows up, instead of just
getting dog-slow or crashing, more instances get spun up and things hum along.
Yes, there are a ton of assumptions involved there-capacity/competence/security/etc. of
the cloud provider. I'm very chary of public cloud for "real work" for this
reason. But if you look at it at the right angle (perhaps squinting a lot!), you can see
that-again, for the right workloads-it gets you out of the business of
provisioning/capacity management/etc. Of course it also encourages inefficient code, but
?maybe? that's OK (again, in the right use cases).
One of the biggest problems, of course, is that folks don't understand the
caveats, go in with both feet first, and get burned. All of the CSPs, for
example, offer some sort of cryptographic service. None of them are BYOK (Bring
Your Own Key)-in other words, you're trusting the service itself not to attack
you or to get compromised and allow an attack. WCGW?
For software vendors, the attraction is that they don't have to build/manage as
much of the platform as they do when they provide a fully functional server.
All that really does is move that requirement from the vendor (once) to each
customer, ...
kick the can
... so it's a win for the vendor and a loss for the customer. That is, the
customer has to do all the vulnerability scanning, patching, etc., instead of
having the vendor do the heavy lifting (the wise customer does the scanning
anyway, but then expects the vendor to provide the updates.) I keep waiting for
the customer world to figure this out; hasn't happened yet AFAICT. Weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
This BYOK thing ... what a concept!
-- R; <><
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
