Considerations on the Good, Fast, and Cheap Trilemma and Why You Shouldn't Opt for Public Cloud

Introduction

The advent of cloud computing is a topic that many companies, regardless of their size, have pondered and formed opinions on. However, the pressure to make a mark in the cloud, combined with a lack of knowledge and other factors, can lead to a limited view of what is truly necessary for the company at that moment, considering its growth projections.

A strong influencer in the choice of cloud are the financial incentives that providers offer for running or migrating workloads to the cloud. It’s indeed tempting, especially for those focused solely on numbers, to see a reduction in Capex and benefits in Opex.

Introducing the “good, fast, and cheap” trilemma can help us understand why this might not be the best choice.

The Trilemma

The “fast, good, and cheap” trilemma is a widely recognized principle in project management, business, engineering, and other areas that deal with production and services. According to this principle, you can only choose two out of the three available options: to do something fast, well, or cheaply. This concept simplifies the illustration of inevitable trade-offs in decision-making. Let’s see how each element interacts:

Good: Means achieving high quality in the final outcome. This usually requires more time (for refinement and revisions) and/or additional resources, which can increase costs or extend timelines. Fast: Refers to the agility in completing a project or delivering a service. Prioritizing speed often implies more resources or overtime, increasing costs or affecting quality. Cheap: Aims to minimize costs. To save money, it might be necessary to compromise on quality or accept longer deadlines, allowing a more efficient use of available resources. How the Trilemma Impacts the Use of Public Cloud

The pursuit of the cloud, aiming for economy, agility, and quality, often fails in practice, as the dynamics establish that it’s impossible to fully achieve these three characteristics:

Good: The cloud offers numerous benefits, but it’s crucial that the company is prepared, both technically and culturally. It’s necessary to question: Do we really need the cloud? Is there a plan B if the on-premises environment becomes unavailable? Is the cost of downtime tolerable within a certain period?

Fast: Migrating or building an environment in the cloud takes time. This process involves planning, building, migrating, and adjustments, and may face challenges, especially with legacy environments.

Cheap: A resilient and fault-tolerant cloud architecture can become very costly as requirements grow. Additionally, operational errors tend to be more common in the cloud, not to mention taxes and currency fluctuations. Therefore, adopting a resilient architecture and data storage in the cloud may contradict the goal of cost reduction.

Perhaps the Cloud Is Not for You

Maximizing what the cloud has to offer requires technical and cultural preparation. The predictable routine of an on-premises environment can become a challenge in the cloud.

Imagine migrating to the use of S3 instead of a local storage system; depending on the volume of data and traffic, the costs can be high. Worse situations occur when internal traffic is directed to the internet, increasing data transfer costs.

These are just two examples of how inappropriate use of the cloud can result in significant losses, which could be easily avoided by staying in an on-premises environment.

As mentioned, the cloud is more suitable for applications specifically designed for that environment. Depending on the workload and requirements, a monolithic on-premises application can serve customers well for a long time. If this text raised questions, know that you are not alone.

A study in the UK showed that 25% of organizations have already migrated part of their workloads back to on-premises environments, mainly due to costs. And the major reason is:

“The most common motivator for repatriation I’ve been seeing is cost. In the survey, more than 43% of IT leaders found that moving applications and data from on-premises to the cloud was more expensive than expected. Although not a part of the survey, the cost of operating applications and storing data on the cloud has also been significantly more expensive than most enterprises expected. The cost-benefit analysis of cloud versus on-premises infrastructure varies greatly depending on the organization.” Source

Conclusion

As we reflect on the complex decision between adopting cloud solutions or staying loyal to on-premises infrastructures, it’s important not to fall into the trap of following trends without a deep analysis of our organizations’ unique needs and strategic goals.

The choice between public cloud, private cloud, or on-premises solutions should not be made without prior study and discussion, much less seen as definitive, but rather as part of an evolving technological strategy that can adapt and scale with the growth and changes of your company.

There is no one-size-fits-all solution to all problems. A good strategy is to extract the best from each option, connecting applications and compatible solutions, considering various factors, including the discussed trilemma.

The reversal to on-premises environments is a rising trend, reflecting the current economic and geopolitical conditions. The choices companies make will be crucial to their survival, and returning to on-premises may be one of them.

Any sugests or doubt?

Feel free to reach out to me on social media: twitter ,linkedin and github.

You can also email me directly at rmnobarra@gmail.com.

Support

Did you really enjoy my content? Consider buying me a coffee through my Bitcoins wallets:

Bitcoin Wallet:

bc1quuv5hml9fjkf7azgwkt4xp867pzdwzyga33qmj

Lighting Address:

lnbc1pjue6mkpp5yj737e7fm6efhlj6sns42a875pmkencqmvdshf4ghlnntaet5llsdqqcqzzsxqrrsssp5d9hxl686w839qkwmkm0m30cf5gp4gnzxh68kss393xqzlsg0wr3q9qyyssqp3933zc3fg46nk3vafh63r3lqd0jn2p04w5xrz77h33rrr3xm7ckegg6s2ss64g4rf4jg87zdjzkl5tup7umqpghy2qnk65tqzsnplcpwv6z4c

Bye!