[toomuchtodo]

Maybe you'll become a billionaire. But probably not. Your monolith in a container will take you far, before we go down the treacherous path of microservices (for team demarcation, not technical scaling, but maybe technical scaling!), container lifecycle management, inbound load balancing, internal load balancing, service mesh and discovery, and all the fun that container orchestration at scale encompasses (are you ready to cry for a bit when you're running on no sleep and you can't determine why your orchestrator is unable to retrieve container images from your registry?).

[diminoten]

How old are you?

[toomuchtodo]

Almost 40, 20+ years of tech experience.

[diminoten]

Are you concerned that you're taking a stance here that's more reflective of your years of experience than of the changing trends in tech?

Experience can be a crutch too, especially in a field that gets upended by new concepts every 3-5 years. I hope you're cognizant of that.

What worked 5 years ago is a joke today, in many cases.

[toomuchtodo]

Not concerned at all. I get paid to de-risk, not to ride the hype train.

> What worked 5 years ago is a joke today, in many cases.

Postgresql was first released in 1997. Lots of the web still runs on PHP, Python 2, and large amounts of Java. What you call a joke, I call a sustainable business and an amortized cost. No one is paying you to use shiny tools, they're paying you to solve business problems.

[anarazel]

Postgres maintains 5 years worth of major releases, not more. After that no more fixes for data corruption, security issues etc. IOW, using that old a version of postgres is careless, and might even bring legal liability after an intrusion (or just data loss).

https://www.postgresql.org/support/versioning/

[diminoten]

Refusing to adopt innovation because it doesn't match with what you knew when you were a technical contributor is risky, too.

Sticking to Python2 is risky. Using a version of Postgres released 5 years ago (9.3) is risky, using legacy PHP is risky, relying on the JVM and Java developers to solve problems that other tech stacks solve faster/better is risky.

What you call a sustainable business with amortized costs I call an un-turnable ship that wastes money dealing with problems that were solved years ago.

[toomuchtodo]

I think you misunderstand. I am not refusing to adopt innovation. I'm refusing to be underpaid to "innovate". If you want to spend sleepless nights troubleshooting beta software in production, it is not my place to stop you. It is my place to not recommend said software to businesses, and this is extremely easy to demonstrate to decision makers.

If you do recommend software to a business that isn't proven (and Kubernetes is still very much unproven, it's first release was only 3 years ago), and it fails, you should be accountable for your poor judgement.