I keep doing more multi-architecture builds using buildx and continue to find good information out there to help refine the process. Here is a post I found I thought I’d share that discusses how to build multi-architecture using AWS Graviton2 based instances which are ARM based. https://www.smartling.com/resources/product/building-multi-architecture-docker-images-on-arm-64-bit-aws-graviton2/. I haven’t officially tried this yet but the same process should also work on a Pi4 with the 64bit PiOS installed.
Came across this blog post by Corey Quinn over on lastweekinaws.com discussing the topic of vendor lock-in, specifically cloud vendors. Corey made some really excellent points but how you are probably already locked in without realizing it. The post reminded me that when I started using AWS after a job change that I was also in the camp of avoiding vendor lock in. Over time I realized, however, that there are some things you must embrace when it comes to a given cloud provider but that doesn’t mean you can’t smartly pick the services you use so that you might leverage some tools that are cloud provider agnostic.
Lets first talk about some additional ways that vendor lock in is inevitable. For starters, if you are not leveraging some of your cloud providers most integral features (speaking purely in AWS terms) like IAM policies and security groups you are almost certainly doing it wrong. Not using IAM policies for configuring an ec2 instance or allowing a CloudFront distribution to access an S3 bucket is usually the wrong way to go about things. You’re much better off just embracing these AWS only techniques in order to build a cleaner, more robust solution. These are the kinds of vendor specific things you should embrace.
However, there are times when you might want to stop and evaluate other options before moving forward. For example, AWS Systems Manager is a tool for managing your systems. Unlike IAM roles, policies and security groups there are other tools out there that provider similar functionality that may be better suited to your needs. Or, maybe you have configuration management that can build and assist in maintaining a database cluster on any provider.
Or maybe you’ve developed your own backup solution that works on any setup. In this case you might want to avoid using RDS unless you really need or want the ease of use that RDS can provide. Maybe the value of having the same tools that you are maintaining work across any cloud provider outweighs the benefits of RDS.
Services like RDS are much easier to cut ties with because your data is actually portable within reasonable limits. Given a normal MySQL RDS instance you can copy the data out and import into some other MySQL system. In these cases I don’t really see RDS as true vendor lock in the sense that you would need to rethink how your software works if you were to move it but rather that if the tooling you’ve built around it is AWS specific that’s where you can get into trouble.
Other services are certainly not that simple and this is where you must carefully consider the services that you use, what your sensitivity to being “locked-in” is and the value that the specific service offers. True vendor lock-in, in my mind, is all about the actual data. Lets say you are considering a video transcoding service that once the videos are transcoded cannot be transferred out or played with out a specific player. This is a great example of a service I would avoid if at all possible and go with some other service that simply accepted an input and provided you with some output to do with as you please.
At the end of the day, avoiding vendor lock-in is a game of determining if what you are looking at is true lock-in or an opportunity to use a platform well and correctly. Avoiding every cloud provider specific tool is almost always a mistake.