Scaling in the Cloud: A Conversation with Jon Tirsen

Scaling in the Cloud: A Conversation with Jon Tirsen

In this episode of the Business Cloud Native, host Emily Omier talks with Jon Tirsen, who is engineering lead for storage at Cash App. This conversation focuses on Cash App’s cloud native journey, and how they are working to build an application that is more scalable, flexible, and easier to manage.


The conversation covers:


  • How the need for hybrid cloud services and uniform program models led Cash App to Kubernetes.
  • Some of the major scaling issues that Cash App was facing. For example, the company needed to increase user capacity, and add new product lines.
  • The process of trying to scale Cash App’s MySQL database, and the decision to split up their dataset into smaller parts that could run on different databases.
  • Cash App’s monolithic application, which contains hundreds of thousands of lines of code — and why it’s becoming increasingly difficult to manage and grow.
  • How Jon’s team is trying to balance product/ business and technical needs, and deliver value while rearchitecting their system to scale their operations.
  • Why Cash App is working to build small, product-oriented teams, and a system where products can be executed and deployed at their own pace through the cloud. Jon also discusses some of the challenges that are preventing this from happening.
  • How Cash App was able to help during the pandemic, by facilitating easy stimulus transfers through their service — and why it wouldn’t have been possible without a cloud native architecture.


Links:


Transcript


Announcer: Welcome to The Business of Cloud Native podcast where we explore how end users talk and think about the transition to Kubernetes and cloud-native architectures.



Emily: Welcome to The Business of Cloud Native. My name is Emily Omier, I'm here chatting with Jon Tirsen.



Jon: Happy to be here. My name is, as you said, Jon Tirsen, and I work as the engineering lead of storage here at Cash App. I've been at Cash for maybe four or five years now. So, I've been with it from the very early days. And before Cash, I was doing a startup, that failed, for five years. So, it's a travel guide in the mobile phone startup. And before that, I was at Google working on another failed product called the Google Wave, which you might remember, and before that, it was a company called ThoughtWorks, which some of you probably know about as well.



Emily: And in case people don't know, the Cash App is part of Square, right?



Jon: Yes. Cash App is where we're separating all the different products quite a lot these days. So, it used to be called just Square Cash, but now it has its own branding and its own identity, and its own leadership, and everything. So, we're trying to call it an ecosystem of startups. So, each product line can run its business the way it wants to, to a large degree.



Emily: And so, what do you actually spend your day doing?



Jon: Most of my days, I'm still code, and doing various operational tasks, and setting up systems, and testing, and that sort of thing. I also, maybe about half my day, I spend on more management tasks, which is reviewing documents, writing documents, and talking to people trying to figure out our strategy and so on. So, maybe about half my time, I do real technical things, and then the other half I do more management stuff.



Emily: Where would you say the cloud-native journey started for you?



Jon: Well, so a lot of Square used to run on-premises. So, we had our own data centers and things. But especially for Cash App, since we've grown so quickly, it started getting slightly out of control. We were basically outgrowing—we could not physically put more machines into our data centers. So, we've started moving a lot of our services over to Amazon in this case, and we want to have a shared way of building services that would work both in the Cloud and also in our data centers.



So, something like Kubernetes and all the tools around that would give us a more uniform programming model that we could use to deploy apps in both of these environments. We started that, two, three years ago. We started looking at moving our workload out of our data centers.



Emily: What were the issues that you were encountering? Give me a little bit more details about the scaling issues that we were talking about.



Jon: There two dimensions that we needed to scale out the Cash App, sort of, system slash [unintelligible] architecture. So, one thing was that we just grew so quickly that we needed to be able to increase capacity. So, that was across the board. So, from databases to application servers, and bandwidth, everywhere. We need to just be able to increase our capacity of handling more users, but also we were trying to grow our product as well. So, at the same time, we also want to build and be able to add new features at an increased pace. So, we want to be able to add new product lines in the Cash App.



So, for example, we built the Cash Card, which is a way you can keep your money in the Cash App bank accounts, and then you can spend that money using a separate card, and then we add a new functionality around that card, and so on. So, we also needed to be able to scale out the team to be able to have more people working on the team to build new products for our users, for our customers. Those are the two dimensions: we needed to scale out the system, but we also needed to have more people be able to work productively. So, that's why we started trying to chop up—we have this big monolith as most companies probably do, which that's I don't know how many hundreds of thousands of lines of code in there. But we also wanted to move things out of that, to be able to have more people contribute productively.



Emily: And where are you in that process?



Jon: Well, [laughs], we're probably adding still adding code at an exponential rate to the monolith. We're also adding code at an exponential rate outside of the monolith, but it just feels so much easier to just build some code in the monolith than it is outside of it, unfortunately, which something we're trying to fix, but it's very hard. And it is getting a little bit out of hand, this monolith now. So, we have, sort of, a moratorium on adding new code to the monolith now, and I'm not sure how much of an effect that has made. But the monolith is still growing, as well as our non-monolith services as well, of course.



Emily: When you were faced with this scaling issue, what were the conversations happening between the technical side and the business owners? And how is this decision made about the best way to solve this problem is x, is the Cloud, is cloud-native architecture?


<...

Jaksot(267)

Getting Your Pricing Model Right-ish with Alex Olivier

Getting Your Pricing Model Right-ish with Alex Olivier

In the second episode that I recorded on-site at KubeCon EU in Paris, I spoke with Alex Olivier, CPO and co-founder of Cerbos. This was not a general discussion: It was focused on the process that Cerbos went through to figure out pricing. Here’s what we talked about:The first step of figuring out your pricing is not the number, but rather what you’re charging for. Is it API calls, or amount of data you’re processing, or monthly active users, or monthly active principles… that last one is what Cerbos is charging forWhy it’s important to have a pricing system that allows potential users to be able to roughly estimate for themselves how much using your software is going to cost themYou also want to avoid pricing models that encourage people to look for ways to hack around to find ways to lower their monthly costsWhy your pricing model should be about the value you’re providing, not about how much it costs you to run your systemDiscovering what your price anchors are / what your customers are comparing you toCheck out the full episode for more details! And join us at Open Source Founders Summit for more discussions about the specifics of pricing for open source companies.

10 Huhti 202425min

Nailing Customer Acquisition with Patrick Backman of MariaDB and OpenOcean

Nailing Customer Acquisition with Patrick Backman of MariaDB and OpenOcean

This week, I had a dilemma: should I prioritize the episode where I spoke with one of the MariaDB co-founders, in which we discuss setting up a foundation as a way to ensure that the project continues to be open source in the future, no matter what (relevant given the Redis announcement); or should I prioritize the conversation with one of the founders of Sonatype, one of the oldest companies in the software supply chain security space, in which we talk about the xz debacle. I went with Patrick Backman, general partner at OpenOcean and co-founder of MariaDB, because it’s a little more in my lane. (The conversation with Brian Fox will have to wait for next week!). One of the main things we discussed was the relationship between the MariaDB foundation and the MariaDB company. Including: Why they decided to put MariaDB open source in a foundation, and why they created a separate foundation instead of putting it in an existing foundation The relationship between MariaDB foundation and company today, including the financial relationshipMariaDB was founded by the founders (and some key employees) at MySQL; we also discussed the lessons learned at MySQL that the team then applied at MariaDB. And we talked about customer acquisition, one of the things that Patrick thinks the team had learned at MySQL and therefore had pretty well figured it out at MariaDB. Patrick’s co-founder Monty Widenius is one of the speakers at Open Source Founders Summit — if you want to go into more details on with the lessons from MySQL and MariaDB, as well as lessons from being an investor at OpenOcean, join us in Paris May 27th and 28th at Open source Founders Summit.

3 Huhti 202436min

Ensuring a Project's Long-Term Survival with William Morgan

Ensuring a Project's Long-Term Survival with William Morgan

This week on The Business of Open Source, I have an episode recorded on site at KubeCon EU in Paris with William Morgan, CEO of Buoyant. We had a fabulous conversation, which touched on some touchy subjects, including Buoyant’s slightly changing relationship with Linkerd. But we talked about:Being an open source mercenary, but also being dedicated to making Linkerd a ‘proper’ open source projectFeeling like open source was table stakes for a company in the space Buoyant plays in. This is an under-appreciated reason for being an open source company — you feel like it’s just expected in the market you play in, so you do. Waiting too long (or is it too long?) to commercializeStarting out by selling support, but the problem with that because Linkerd worked well and people kept saying that they didn’t need support because they never had problemsCompeting against Istio, which was backed by the Google engine and how that made Linkerd / Buoyant an underdog (or cockroach). For those of you who haven’t been following Linkerd / Buoyant… Buoyant recently announced that they would be doing edge releases for Linkerd, but not stable releases. We talked about why they made this change and how the ecosystem responded. Check out the full episode!

27 Maalis 202435min

From Project to Profit with Heather Meeker

From Project to Profit with Heather Meeker

This week on The Business of Open Source I talked to Heather Meeker, General Partner of OSS Capital and author of From Project to Profit, How to Build a Business around your Open Source Project. We talked about some things that I entirely agree with, and then there were some points I challenged Heather on — all in all, it was fabulous conversation. Here’s what we covered:Why you should think of your project and product as two different products so you avoid thinking of your open source project as a loss leader and get your incentives rightThe differences between supplementary and complementary products, and how the relationship between project and product is often complementary, even in situations where that relationship is non-obviousWe disagreed about pricing — should COSS businesses have cheaper products than closed-source companies? Why cares about your being open source? Are open source companies more capital efficient? Heather says so, but I’m not convinced. Heather also talked about how they select companies to invest inDo open source companies by definition do a better job at paying attention to user / customer demand? Check out the episode, and check out more about Heather Meeker here: Personal websiteOSS CapitalLinkedIn

20 Maalis 202437min

Delivering Value Quickly in the Observability Space with Pranay Prateek

Delivering Value Quickly in the Observability Space with Pranay Prateek

This week on The Business of Open Source I spoke with Pranay Prateek, co-founder of SigNoz. Pranay talked about why open source is important to SigNoz's business, why it's super important to deliver value quickly, even for an observability product, and why founders shouldn't think of open source just as a distribution model. We also covered: How SigNoz is differentiated in the crowded observability marketWhy Pranay thinks being open source makes it much easier for developers to play around with the project and get to know it; so for them it made intuitive sense that the company that they’d build an open source company Why Pranay also thinks open source enables much deeper integrations, which is critically important for an observability company like SigNozHow one of their first lessons / mistakes was releasing an open source project that didn’t work well on an individual developer’s laptop, because it used too much resourcesThe GTM market, and the challenge delivering value within 30 minutes of trying out the project/product for an observability tool that provides maximum value during an incident — but no one is going to be trying out a new tool during an incident situation Why their first commercial product was a cloud offeringAnd much more! And if you’re interested in more discussions of open source businesses, make sure to join us at Open Source Founders Summit this May.

13 Maalis 202439min

OSFS Special Episode: Being a Strategic Acquisition Target as an OSS Company with Thomas Di Giacomo

OSFS Special Episode: Being a Strategic Acquisition Target as an OSS Company with Thomas Di Giacomo

In this special episode to promote Open Source Founders Summit, I went deep with Thomas di Giacomo about how open source companies can position themselves as attractive acquisition targets for strategic buyers. If you are the founder of an open source company and you have the idea of being acquired even in the back of your mind, this is a must-listen episode. Whether or not you plan to join us May 27th and 28th in Paris, though of course we hope you do join us. By the way, at OSFS Thomas is going to lead a workshop on the topic of being an acquisition target for open source companies. It will be interactive, which means you can ASK QUESTIONS. In this podcast episode, he talked about: Exits 101. You probably know that strategic buyers usually pay more for companies than other types of acquirers, but we talked about different exit strategies and what they entailWhy strategic buyers acquire businesses (in general) but also why you, as the business seller, need to understand every specific potential acquirer’s story and goals so you can see how your company fits into their strategic planStrategic acquisitions are about 1+1=3… so you have to know what your buyer’s “3” isWhy it’s important to be self-aware and know your own goals before you sign any acquisition paperworkAnd tons more… If you want the chance to ask Thomas about strategic acquisitions for OSS companies — as well as to talk about sales strategies, lead generation and more — join us at OSFS 24 in Paris this May 27th and 28th. —> Get your invite here. PS the audio was a little quiet, but so if you’re having trouble hearing turn up the volume, it’s worth it.

12 Maalis 202432min

Buyer-Based Open Core with Zach Wasserman

Buyer-Based Open Core with Zach Wasserman

This week on The Business of Open Source, I spoke with Zach Wasserman, co-founder and CTO of Fleet. This was a fabulous episode for many reasons, but then again I never do crappy episodes, right? The first thing I wanted to call your attention to is that Zach talked about how he’s building an open core business because building an open source business is what he wants to do. When his previous company turned away from open source, Zach left to do consulting around OSquery and Fleet (the project). I always like to talk about how companies / founders need a solid reason for building an open source company… and “this is the kind of company I want to build” is a very good reason. (“Everyone else is doing it” on the other hand, is not a good reason). Everyone puts constraints around the type of company the want to build, and as long as you are intentionally about the decisions, there is nothing wrong about this, business-wise.Second, we talked about the tension that exists between making a great project and still leaving room for a commercial product that people will pay for, and Zach talked through how Fleet uses a buyer-based open core strategy to decide which functionality to put in the enterprise version or in the open core. We also talked about:Leaving his first company, Kolide, when the founders had divergent visions about where the company should goHow his investor arranged a ‘co-founder marriage’ for Zach and his co-founder Mike McNeilHow the transparency aspect of open source can be extremely important, especially for anything in the security spaceLastly, Fleet happens to be a former client of mine. You can check out what Mike, Zach’s co-founder, said about working with me here. And if you’re interested in more conversations like this… but in person!!! you should come to Open Source Founders Summit May 27th and 28th in Paris.

6 Maalis 202437min

The Evolving Relationship between Apache Cassandra and DataStax

The Evolving Relationship between Apache Cassandra and DataStax

Slightly different The Business of Open Source episode today! I spoke with Patrick McFadin and Mick Semb Wever about the relationship between Apache Cassandra and DataStax — how it was at the beginning and how the relationship has evolved over the years. We talked about:— How there was a dynamic around Cassandra where many of the many of the contributors ended up being sucked into the DataStax orbit, simply because it allowed those contributors to work on on Cassandra full-time— How there can be tensions between different stakeholders simply because everyone involved ultimately has their own interests at heart, and those interests are not always aligned. — How it is actually hard to really have open discussions about new features, and how often there can be a new feature dropped in a project that clearly had been developed behind closed doors for some time, and sometimes that created tension in the community— Some open source projects are just too complex to be hobby projects — Cassandra is so complex that you won’t become a code contributor unless you’re working full-time on Cassandra, because that’s the level of skill you need to keep up. — How the relationship between a company and a project often changes as the technology matures. — The importance of addressing tensions between company and community head-on, as adults, when they occur — as well as why you need to remember to treat people as humans and remember that they have good days, bad days, goals and interests. Patrick on LinkedInMick on LinkedIn

28 Helmi 202440min

Suosittua kategoriassa Liike-elämä ja talous

sijotuskasti
mimmit-sijoittaa
psykopodiaa-podcast
puheenaihe
rss-rahapodi
ostan-asuntoja-podcast
pomojen-suusta
rss-startup-ministerio
rss-lahtijat
rss-rahamania
rahapuhetta
rss-neuvottelija-sami-miettinen
kasvun-kipuja
rss-h-asselmoilanen
rss-turvacast
taloudellinen-mielenrauha
leadcast
syo-nuku-saasta
muutosakatemia-coaching-podcast
lakicast