> bash ./02-install-database.sh # Deploys PostgreSQL, Redis, Qdrant, Elasticsearch

geez

sorry but, how much SHIT is it going to take to make AI good?

Maintaining databases is painful, so ApeRAG uses kubeblocks for all these databases.

What’s funny is Postgres alone can handle this entire workload decently well.

Postgres isn't a replacement for elastic. You CAN get full text search working in postgres, and for very basic use cases it's good enough, but it's vastly inferior to elastic in terms of features and performance.

Exactly. These "extensions".. they are good, but, far from being replacements for dedicated products, the quality of which customers have come to expect.

This is a very typical, and pretty bare-bones stack. Almost any production grade webapp above a minimal threshold of complexity will have database, cache, and search.

This is just one of a million other wrappers around AI that will be forgotten in a few months.

Yes, and that doesn't change the fact that the stack is typical.

Most businesses don't need google or netflix level engineering. People on HN are outliers. The corporate world needs simple CRUD apps so tech savvy but non developer employees can stop grinding away at Excel.

> Most of us who were around 15+ years ago recall a lot of BigCorp had to be dragged unwillingly into mobile by internal useres/devs who got their first iPhone and saw the light.

Yeah thanks guys. Now I have outlook/teams on my phone and am expected to be reachable 24/7. If not, I'm expected to respond to text, and share my phone number with my colleagues. Those I don't directly share it with will get it from someone who knows me.

These days anyone can spin up a developer account and check it out. Near as I could tell, you can create abstract 'objects' and link them to datasets/columns in the environment. And then you can link objects together. It's basically just an ER modeling tool, but they have great sales and seemed to have convinced people that they are constructing ontologies.

Microsoft is building it's own in-house LLM's based on OpenAI's IP. Google builds it's own models.

Sure, but you can also sell something without having built it yourself, just as Microsoft Copilot supports OpenAI and Anthropic models.

It doesn't have to be either/or of course - a cloud provider may well support a range of models, some developed in house and some not.

Vertical integration - a cloud provider building everything they sell - isn't necessarily the most logical business model. Sometimes it makes more sense to buy from a supplier, giving up a bit of margin, than build yourself.

I'm just an observer. Microsoft has invested billions in OpenAI and can access their IP as a result. It might even be possible MS hopes that OpenAI fails and doesn't allow them to restructure to continue to acquire outside funding. You can go directly to the announcement of their in-house model offerings and they are clearly using this as a recruiting tool for talent. Whether it makes sense for the cloud providers to build their own models is not for me to say, but they may not have a choice given how quickly OpenAI/Anthropic are burning cash. If those two fail then they're essentially ceding the market to Google.

LOL

Toad is already an incredibly well known tool for developing with oracle db's

These people make me hate working. They don't want to pair with anyone. Understanding work at all is anathema to them. Their brains are too large for such trivial matters.

Ah nice an AI generated MCP gateway. I can't wait to see how many different agent/tool protocols we'll run through this year, and how many gateways. I just spin up oauth2proxy to handle authentication with istio gateway. Maybe I should be deploying piles of unknown code instead?

oauth2proxy actually doesn't work for MCP servers due to missing dynamic client registration..

You're right, we're not strictly implementing things according to the spec/oauth 2.1

You're lucky to not have experienced what came before Teams in most corporate environments.

What do you have in mind? Skype was ok, and before that it was mostly e-mail in companies I had contact with.

SharePoint sucked from its inception though.

Lync and Skype for Business were far faster and more pleasant to use than Teams, in my experience.