No doubt. Reading this thread leads me to believe that almost no one wants to take responsibility for anything anymore, even hiring the right people. Why even hire someone who isn't going to take responsibility for their work and be part of a team? If an org is worried about the "bus factor" they are probably not hiring the right people and/or the org management has poor team building skills.
Exactly, I just don't understand the grandparent's point, why have a "Postgres person" at all? I hire an engineer who should be able to do it all, no wonder there's been a proliferation of full stack engineers over specialized ones.
And especially having worked in startups, I was expected to do many different things, from fixing infrastructure code one day to writing frontend code the next. If you're in a bigger company, maybe it's understandable to be specialized, but especially if you're at a company with only a few people, you must be willing to do the job, whatever it is.
Because working now at what used to be startup size, not having X Person leads to really bad technical debt problems as that person Handling X was not really skilled enough to be doing so but it was illusion of success. Those technical debt problems are causing us massive issues now and costing the business real money.
Some of the largest orgs have large amounts of IT infrastructure for OT and ISS that is not connected to the Internet. This infra is air gapped or often times on a completely separate physical LAN which is not accessible without passing through multiple physical security controls.
There are a lot of OT, safety and security infrastructure that must be run on premise in large orgs and require four to five nines of availability. Much of the underlying network, storage, and compute infra for these OT and SS solutions run proprietary OSs based on a BSD OS. BSD OSs are chosen specifically for their performance, security and stability. These solutions will often run for years without a reboot. If a patch is required to resolve a defect or vulnerability it generally does not require a reboot of the kernel and even so these solutions usually have HA/clustering capabilities to allow for NDU (non disruptive upgrades) and zero downtime of the IT infra solution.
The BSD/Illumos OSs are used quite frequently as the base OS for high end commercial/enterprise network, SAN, NAS etc. solutions. They are chosen for it's performance, stability and HA features.
Good stuff - thanks for sharing. IaC and containers are great but having the ability to run multiple VMs and create snapshots prior to performing upgrades or security patches is still very helpful from an operational perspective.
Shaving is not expensive if you simply clean the blade after using it. Cleaning the blades slows the oxidation process on the edge which is the primary contributor to poor blade performance.
I once friend-of-a-friend met somebody, a materials science grad student who had "invented/applied" a high tech alloy to the edge that allowed for blades to last at least 10x. But instead of for shaving, the big money was in blades sold to flooring carpet cutters, they use a new blade for every cut. His selling proposition was (conservative) 5x which would really increase productivity/save labor. Problem is, his market was too scared to try it, at the risk of messing up an expensive piece of carpet which had been ordered in fixed quantity, they'd rather just put in a new blade, the cost wasn't an issue.
The main blocker (other than needing to buy new NICs, since everything I have already came with quad 1/1/10/10) is I'm heavily invested into the Ubiquiti ecosystem, and since they killed off the USW-Leaf (and the even more brief UDC-Leaf), they don't have anything that fits the bill.
I'm not entirely opposed to getting a Mikrotik or something and it just being the oddball out, but it's nice to have everything centrally managed.
EDIT: They do have the PRO-Aggregation, but there are only 4x 25G ports. Technically it _would_ meet my needs for Ceph, and Ceph only.
