Fully agree. The foundation of education is learning how the world actually is, not how we wish it would be.

I love the joke. The thing is, it's not so funny when companies actually try to do this on their own systems. I've never seen a 4x deep observability stack. But I have seen 3x, an entire project team dedicated to building a system that watches the watchers. It gets absurd.

A recent contract job of mine used Apache because they had written a critical component of their application as an Apache module. 10 years ago. There isn't much incentive to change it.

When people ask these questions, do they think people are actively choosing to use the old technology? That's a huge misunderstanding. It's not an apache vs nginx decision. It's do nothing vs spend precious time on a side quest to upgrade. Opportunity cost is your answer.

And re: performance, keep in mind that very few applications are limited by the speed of their HTTP server. You first look at your application servers, networks, disks, databases. If your app is truly HTTP-bound, well you're probably not still using Apache! IOW the people who NEED to upgrade from apache for performance reason already have. For the rest, there is no incentive.

Docker was the first viable containerization technology on Linux. Despite the 15 year late start vs FreeBSD Jails, it's certainly winning by the numbers.

But that has nothing to do with their respective UXs. It's a Linux vs FreeBSD signal.

Is there an unavoidable tradeoff here? Keys that order nicely (auto-incrementing integers, UUIDv7) naturally leak information. Keys that are more secure (UUIDv4) can have performance problems because they have poor locality.

Or are there any random id generators that can compromise, remain sequential-ish without leaking exact timestamps and global ordering?