This is the way. We've given multiple clients very similar stacks for "api layers" and it's by far the most cost effective way to do AWS from both productivity and opex point of view.
Agreed. This is a limitation we ran into trying to implement a critical accounting ledger on top of DynamoDB. The transaction model we came up with is formally verified w/ TLA+. We're turning our work into a product: txlayer.com
A fair question, and we’ve done it this way before at simple.com. When looking at the options for a pay-per use database, with global replication, streams and managed for you; We felt that if you could build a ledger on dynamo for these use cases, it’d be pretty compelling and fun.
From the issues I've read on github, anecdotally, is that the approach of the gazelle and rules_go teams is to leverage the standard go tooling and not make changes to go itself.
Also anecdotally, bazel and golang work really well together IME. The community seems pretty active, and the upsides of using gazelle/bazel with golang seem to outweigh any downsides (though I'd be hard pressed to name a downside, that isn't inherit to golang itself).
> Also anecdotally, bazel and golang work really well together IME... and the upsides of using gazelle/bazel with golang seem to outweigh any downsides
This is really not my experience from having used Bazel with Go for the last four years. But I'm happy you are are apparently not running into issues.
I've been using about the same amount of time. Have you tried using python and bazel? Now there's some real weeping and gnashing of teeth ;) Lot's of bad code depending on python == python2 type of non-sense.
Javascript is another target that is just about as gnarly. The node module resolution algorithm is reimplemented a million similar-but-not-quite-the-same-ways by popular packages, most of which struggle dealing w/ symlink-heavy codebases (like bazel sandboxes).
The GND with its extensive use of private contractors is basically neoliberal like our current DoD. It is structured almost exactly the same as DoD and with a vague never-ending mission would likely take as much resources to fight an enemy that may honestly always exist. A better policy would be focused upon global trade policies to globally incentivize all countries to choose cleaner infrastructure. This sobering reality is one I certainly found refreshing from the Yang climate worldview than the climate alarmist view that civilization ends if we don't go carbon neutral in 8 years aggressively pushing the GND as a gold standard policy.
Let's just look at one (expensive) idea proposed in the GND:
>Upgrading all existing buildings and building new ones so that they achieve maximum energy efficiency, water efficiency, safety, affordability, comfort, and durability.
How is a directive to upgrade all existing buildings, anything but central planning of an entire industry?
That sounds awfully like a nod towards developers and REITs that you'd get property tax breaks and/or credits if you hit LEED certification levels.
What is the problem with that? It's already a thing, just not nationally. You get that pro-jobs angle for contractors, provide a stop-gap when new construction slows servicing existing owners looking to reduce costs.
You're reading the proposals with an ... impractical eye.
Imagine x=2π is Wyoming, x=3π is Berlin, y depicts average winter temperature. Expected situation is b=2.5; current situation is b=2.75.
This is of course a silly example, but illustrates the idea of what happens when you push around parameters of a periodic function. Weather is spatially periodic.
Bend's layout also has some constraints as well with National Forest and BLM land surrounding it :-/ That and every Californian wants to pack into the West-side of town so prices get super wonky.
