[serverholic]

There's nothing wrong with running your app locally. We're writing software, not building skyscrapers.

You don't need hundreds of terabytes to run an app with test data.

Monolith's aren't bad.

[_kblcuk_]

Running app locally -- yes, there's nothing wrong with that. Running 25 different apps that compose "the platform" only to be able to develop something -- sounds overkill to me.

[serverholic]

If you have 25 apps to run locally, chances are that your system is over-engineered.

[PaulHoule]

It depends what kind of system you are running.

NASA had two versions of the space shuttle software developed in parallel by teams at IBM and Rockwell. None of the devs had a whole space shuttle.

[serverholic]

Of course there are always exceptions. More than likely, people on here aren't thinking about NASA software.

[Rumudiez]

Which is probably why they ran it all locally first!

[tutfbhuf]

> You don't need hundreds of terabytes to run an app with test data.

Well you could just mock the data and code, but then the according to the author:

> "Run an individual service against mocks" doesn't count. A mock will rarely behave identically to the real dependency, and the behavior of the individual service will be unrealistic. You need to run the actual system.

[serverholic]

If your data is too large to replicate locally then downloading a subset of data is better than nothing.

[marcosdumay]

Test data is not a mock.

What matters here are the odds that the production system will behave the same way as your tests. For functional requirements (not performance), the normal situation is that if you replace your data, those odds do not decrease a lot. If you want to test performance, that changes, and you may need an environment as large as your production one.

[tutfbhuf]

> and you may need an environment as large as your production one.

Yes, but isn't that exactly what the author suggests?

[marcosdumay]

The author is suggesting running your code (all of it) in a separate environment, that isn't prod. There is a passing acknowledgment that data exists, but nothing more about it. Very likely, he don't talk about data because bringing all of your data into another environment is indeed not viable for a lot of people, or even legal for some.

If you replace all of your data, it's still your code running there. But you must have some data, or your code won't run, and it must look like real data, or your environment will be fake again... where "look like real data" is completely problem dependent.