I have written about “the right tool for the job” repeatedly. Because (again) we are absolutists in IT. My father was an antiques restorer that dabbled in flipping houses and was rather forceful about the “right tool for the job.” When I left the service and joined IT, it was something of a shock to me that the “right tool for the job” was considered situational.
At the time, there were a large number of Microsoft zealots that loved Visual Basic, and a larger number of non-zealots that preferred C or Java. That was how we got to my first “right tool” article. VB was very strong with regard to UI and record crunching, while to-the-metal was C’s strength and Java fell in between the two—not being perfect at either. So my article stated that. Front-ending databases? Use VB. Writing drivers and low-level processes? Use C/C++. Need a bit of both and easy web page generation? Go with Java.
It is many years later and time for an article that seems just as obvious to me, but in a different IT space. We have all heard of the three architectures: Data center, cloud and mixed/multi-cloud. We have also heard of how, in this rapidly changing world of DevOps, Agile and containers, different organizations are using different deployment methodologies. That’s all good so far. Just as the variety of programming languages available today is a bonus in many ways, so are multiple deployment and operations options.
Where it gets sticky is when people include the “We’re an X shop” in conversations. Or try to do everything under the sun with one of these methodologies. For many of us, container infrastructure is perfect. Use an orchestrator like Kubernetes, build systems and security practices, then not have to care much if the Kubernetes instance it runs on is on-premises, hosted or cloud. Of course you have to care some. Networks have to connect, etc. But most of the work is done.
Then there are the people that have use cases that don’t fit this mold and have not acknowledged that fact yet. This blog is for you. We’ve all heard of companies that have containers whose life expectancy is measured in seconds. Beyond that, I was told about a company that is using containers as message queues. Honestly. Creating a container with a startup command and putting it on a queue. When it is pulled off the queue, it executes that command and then goes away. We’ll call this crowd the “Over Users”.
Finally, we have the people that cannot or will not be moving their systems anywhere. There are a variety of reasons for this, but these are companies that know their applications will continue to run in the data center for the foreseeable future. We’ll call this group the “No Needs”.
For Over Users, that is literally what serverless is for. Create a queue with a (much smaller) call to an API in a serverless environment and be done. Fewer configuration issues, less maintenance, less everything but code. Add a trigger, remove entire OS/network/configuration generation and maintenance. The most likely resistance to this advice is “But we have an investment…” Yes. And for most orgs it is an investment in unnecessary technical debt. Divest. Keep the good parts—a container architecture meant to shuffle through many containers that exist for a short time is well-architected.
For No Needs, before you port everything to containers—which I am generally in total support of—you should consider if you need to; think about if it offers any benefits and what the ROI of such a move is. Honestly. For DevOps-heavy shops or orgs that require highly portable solutions, the ROI of containers is quick and obvious. For orgs whose applications are not changing a ton and are highly unlikely to move anywhere, the ROI is a whole lot murkier. “But it gives us options!” is the most likely negative response to “We don’t need that right now.” But that’s the problem—you have those options now. What it gives you is a shifting of cost from some possible future where it might be needed to today’s already constrained budget. If there is a verifiable need—normally in portability, but any verifiable need—then make the move. Until then, spend that time and money making those apps rock.
You’re doing it. The lights are on and the applications are useful. Use the architecture that makes sense for what you are trying to achieve. Right tool for the job, as my Dad often said (he said it a bit more forcefully when I thought a chisel was a screwdriver, but that’s a different story). Keep rocking it, and stay focused on need.
