How We Found 7 TiB of Memory Just Sitting Around

I read this and I have to wonder, did anyone ever think it was reasonable that a cluster that apparently needed only 120gb of memory was consuming 1.2TB just for logging (or whatever vector does)

We're a much smaller scale company and the cost we lose on these things is insignificant compared to what's in this story. Yesterday I was improving the process for creating databases in our azure and I stumbled upon a subscription which was running 7 mssql servers for 12 databases. These weren't elastic and they were each paying a license that we don't have to pay because we qualify for the base cost through our contract with our microsoft partner. This company has some of the thightest control over their cloud infrastructure out of any organisation I've worked with.

This is anecdotal, but if my experiences aren't unique then there is a lot of lack of reasonable in DevOps.

Isn't that mostly down to the fact the vast majority of devs explicitly don't want to do anything wrt Ops?

DevOps has - ever since it's originally well meaning inception (by Netflix iirc?) - been implemented across our industry as an effective cost cutting measure, forcing devs that didn't see it as their job to also handle it.

Which consequently means they're not interfacing with it whatsoever. They do as little as they can get away with, which inevitably means things are being done with borderline malicious compliance... Or just complete incompetence.

I'm not even sure I'd blame these devs in particular. The devs just saw it as a quick bonus generator for the MBA in charge of this rebranding while offloading more responsibilities in their shoulders.

DevOps made total sense in the work culture where this concept was conceived - Netflix was well known at that point to only ever employ senior Devs. However, in the context of the average 9-5 dev, which often knows a lot less then even some enthusiastic Jrs... Let's just say that it's incredibly dicey wherever it's successful in practice.