We've built an open-source feature flag server for 11 years
Posted by ivarconr 5 hours ago
Comments
Comment by sgt 4 hours ago
Thoughts after about 3 minutes of browsing: OK, this actually makes sense and I see why people would pay for this. The value proposition is definitely there
Comment by ivarconr 3 hours ago
Comment by kleiba2 2 hours ago
Comment by cfontes 2 hours ago
If you work on a small startup, not worth it... on a Big corp with a lot of bureaucracy? It's worth it I think.
We have tried self-hosting it, but it's always a pain to allocate people on infra to do it, so I gave up and started paying for it for my teams, and they love it.
Comment by everforward 53 minutes ago
They have non-linear scaling complexity, so they work fine with bumping up resources until they don’t and now you’re looking at queueing metrics on Kafka or something equally complicated. They’re horrible to change out because a lot of the APIs aren’t compatible and literally everything uses them.
They’re also awful to maintain. Everything uses them so there’s never a window when it’s convenient to shut down the feature flag system for upgrades or to test backup restores. People are much more accepting of “the vendor will be down for 2 hours on Saturday” than “I’m taking the system down for 2 hours on Saturday”.
Comment by amelius 3 hours ago
Comment by jascha_eng 3 hours ago
Comment by brookst 3 hours ago
I haven’t used unleash but it’s pretty clear your characterization is wildly wrong. 30 seconds looking at docs shows it has features for gradual rollouts, A/B testing, experimentaion with analytics, authentication to control available features, and probably a lot more I missed in a quick skim.
Comment by soco 2 hours ago
Comment by sureglymop 5 minutes ago
This seem to be open source and self hostable (is it AGPL licensed?).
Can I, for personal use, fully self host every component? Or is it open core and e.g. multi tenancy isn't there etc.
Comment by ivarconr 5 seconds ago
Comment by 0x70dd 4 hours ago
Comment by notfried 4 hours ago
These SaaS companies are only valued this much because they charge based on MAUs, not request-based. I prefer PostHog's model. 100M requests/month is ~$2K [*].
[*] I'm not affiliated with PostHog.
Comment by ivarconr 3 hours ago
Comment by skeeter2020 4 hours ago
There is no way a Feature Flag system is a multi Billion dollar company based on the tech, and if there IS a Saas-pocalypse it's coming for players like LD first.
Comment by pvo50555 3 hours ago
Comment by paulryanrogers 2 hours ago
Comment by figmert 1 hour ago
I'm not advocating for LD, I'm advocating for any feature management system.
Comment by LollipopYakuza 2 hours ago
Comment by thomaspoignant 1 hour ago
Comment by ivarconr 3 hours ago
Comment by vouwfietsman 2 hours ago
Same features as all these big guys, EU hosted, and down-to-earth pricing. Even the free tier got me quite far.
I'm unaffiliated btw.
Comment by gib444 3 minutes ago
Comment by jonhohle 3 hours ago
Comment by hobofan 3 hours ago
Audience is decided by analytics tool -> Feature flag server maps audience to feature flag value -> Analytics tool tracks its events and includes feature flag value as attribute
Comment by jonhohle 2 hours ago
Analytics is a much broader set of tooling. It can (and should) report similar things.
Comment by hobofan 1 hour ago
The main point of a FF system is that you have a runtime-controllable mapping from user attributes to feature flags, where a set of logic rules can dictate who is exposed to what feature. With most analytics-tool based rollouts, you would be able to only directly set an attribute and you then hard-wire that attribute to the feature toggle in app code, which gives you a lot less flexibility and always requires a engineer in the hot path when it comes to doing rollouts.
Comment by horticulturist 3 hours ago
Comment by wmichelin 3 hours ago
Granted we have a whole team supporting just that experimentation platform, but it's pretty cool. They even expose an MCP server for us to have agents do experiment analysis for us using.
Comment by jonhohle 2 hours ago
Comment by ivarconr 3 hours ago
Comment by hmokiguess 2 hours ago
- Feature Flags used as Configs;
- Configs used as Feature Flags;
- Live Ops, Control Groups, Experiments, Analytics, and more bundled as "extras" to Feature Flags as if they were the right parent term;
I think classical systems/engineering see feature flags as boolean state in some data store, but these PaaS are pushing it as a new thing and struggling with marketing.
I wish they took the gaming companies lesson and started using the term "Live Ops"
Comment by rafabulsing 1 hour ago
Comment by hmokiguess 1 hour ago
Comment by kalcode 2 hours ago
If you have good CI/CD practices, an ENV for the environment has what feature is simplest. No new dependencies, change code commit deploy.
Non-tech folks need something else that allows them to switch it on and then off. For a variety of reasons.
Comment by figmert 1 hour ago
Feature management goes well beyond an env var. Sure an env var change is fine on it's own, but a change of the feature flag (essentially a release) requires a deployment.
Feature management separates these two. You can deploy without releasing. Because the code is there, but dormant behind an if that can change at runtime, you can actually target users, segments, or even do progressive rollout, and so much more. What this also means is you can test your changes in production without causing prod to go down. Best of all, a release doesn't mean a bad deployment.
It's not just about non-tech folks. It separates deploy and release in the SDLC, and that opens up a whole new world.
Comment by ctkhn 2 hours ago
Comment by VulgarExigency 1 hour ago
Comment by linesofcode 2 hours ago
Comment by Thomaschaaf 2 hours ago
Comment by soco 2 hours ago
Comment by joaohaas 2 hours ago
if redis_client.get("staging.feature-flag"):
...
For frontend you add an endpoint that exposes this value.I guess their frontend for managing these is 'nice', but at the end of the day it's a static page that sets flags on redis.
Comment by matsemann 2 hours ago
Comment by dolmen 1 hour ago
Comment by stackghost 2 hours ago
Comment by ivarconr 11 minutes ago
Comment by anonymous908213 4 hours ago
The only appealing marketing I've seen in the past three years
Comment by ivarconr 3 hours ago
Comment by yuppiepuppie 5 hours ago
I couldnt imagine a lot of teams are debating anymore whether to build their own or use an off the shelf product like this. The former being a straight forward task for an LLM. And the latter being a point of failure/attack for any one want to mess with the core foundations of a product.
Comment by FinnKuhn 4 hours ago
Building something, updating it, running it, testing etc. still requires resources and attention. One example for this would be taxis. You pay for the comfort of not having to drive the car, do maintenance, take into account road works, cleaning, etc. and not because you couldn't drive a car yourself. That time you can use instead to focus on your actual business.
Comment by chanhyounglee 1 hour ago
Comment by leetrout 4 hours ago
The owner at my current gig has multiple times said "software is over" as it being a sort of gravy train of rent seeking. Products are gonna have to offer real / significant value to attract new customers. Maybe even to keep them, too...
Comment by skeeter2020 4 hours ago
This sounds good in theory but - and I speak from experience with a FF system causing a system-wide outage - clients don't care why YOU had an outage, or that it's not immediately your fault, and they really shouldn't have to. The reality is more like you're paying for a dependecy that you can't mitigate.
Comment by hobofan 2 hours ago
Given that every FF system comes with a bunch of different mechanisms that prevent your system from being catastrophically impacted in case the provider goes down, its still the fault of the integrating party if you experience an outage due to a FF provider.
Comment by gerardnico 4 hours ago
Comment by higeorge13 4 hours ago
Comment by ltbarcly3 2 hours ago
Comment by konfusinomicon 1 hour ago
Comment by ivarconr 12 minutes ago
Comment by selinajing1001 1 hour ago
Comment by sneak 2 hours ago
Comment by kleiba2 2 hours ago
Comment by sneak 2 hours ago
Comment by levkk 50 minutes ago
AGPL does not require you to share your changes if you use it (like most people) internally. It does if you host it for others as a service. Pretty fair trade.
Freedom to use, modify and distribute, clearly enforced for the Internet age.
Comment by sneak 17 minutes ago
The text of the AGP License does not support this claim.
Comment by ivarconr 5 hours ago
Unleash started in 2014 as an internal tool at my company at the time, because we wanted to ship to production continuously without big-bang releases. It's an Open-Source feature flag platform with SDKs for >25 languages.
A few design choices that might be interesting:
- Local evaluation: server-side SDKs fetch the flag config and evaluate in-process, so user data never leaves your app and a flag check is a memory lookup, not a network call.
- Shared Rust engine (Yggdrasil): the evaluation logic is written once in Rust and embedded in the SDKs, so behaviour is the same across languages.
- Unleash Edge: a Rust proxy/cache for frontend and edge clients at scale. (Commercial)
- OpenFeature: supported if you don't want to lock into our SDKs.
Comment by gegtik 2 hours ago
if you already are in a platform capture situation, eg. Azure App Configuration or AWS AppConfig where you already integrate with platform tools using the native auth primitives, what is the benefit one can expect from switching to unleash?
Comment by ivarconr 13 minutes ago
Comment by arbor-group 2 hours ago
Comment by patryk_builds 3 hours ago