I think that there are disadvantages to using a PaaS. It can bring all of these components together, but it also means that you don't benefit from best of breed systems at each layer.
Also, up until now most PaaSes were vertically integrated and opaque. I imagine that the PaaS of the future will look more like OpenShift where it is a curated set of components in this stack instead of an opaque stack.
I worked on one of those "opaque" stacks, and as you can imagine, I disagree. Not least because everything we develop is done in the open.
As a developer, all I care about is that the code I tested locally and that passed on CI runs the same way in production, without further thought or effort.
As an operator, all I care about is that I don't get paged when a bad piece of dev code rampages and chokes the shared resource.
PaaSes have solved this. There's just no reason left to roll your own.
Comments
Notice that, at the bottom, the advice is to use a PaaS.
I think that there are disadvantages to using a PaaS. It can bring all of these components together, but it also means that you don't benefit from best of breed systems at each layer.
Also, up until now most PaaSes were vertically integrated and opaque. I imagine that the PaaS of the future will look more like OpenShift where it is a curated set of components in this stack instead of an opaque stack.
I worked on one of those "opaque" stacks, and as you can imagine, I disagree. Not least because everything we develop is done in the open.
As a developer, all I care about is that the code I tested locally and that passed on CI runs the same way in production, without further thought or effort.
As an operator, all I care about is that I don't get paged when a bad piece of dev code rampages and chokes the shared resource.
PaaSes have solved this. There's just no reason left to roll your own.