![]() It’s effectively as if you were to acknowledge that, yes, there exists an elegant, battle-tested solution to the problem you need to solve, and then instead opt to do something that takes way more effort (read “money”) and yields a far worse solution that doesn’t really work. In fact, we could arguably classify going this route as a “mistake”, or even a “bad call”. These tedious, employee-churning tasks will tie up resources that would be better spent on improving your software or service. ![]() If you pass on full-app embedding and try to hack together an alternative, you’ll not just incur technical debt, you’ll also end up taking on the nontrivial overhead of 1) maintaining the signed embeds for individual customers, 2) dealing with authentication and permissions, and 3) fielding ad hoc customer requests for data. But the return on investment you’ll get from a full-app setup dwarfs the ROI of maintaining alternative solutions (like a Metabase fork, or a bunch of signed embeds), especially as you try to keep up with a never-ending queue of ad hoc requests for data. There is an upfront cost for full-app embedding, in terms of licensing and initial operational overhead. ![]() The reason that some people hesitate when considering full-app embedding (hence this article) is because they worry that full-app embedding is more expensive from both a labor and licensing perspective, and they think they might be able to get away with juggling signed embeds with locked parameters to restrict data. And self-service meaning that all customers can create their own questions to run ad hoc queries, so you don’t have to write those queries for them. Multi-tenant meaning Customer A cannot see Customer B’s data, and vice versa. With this setup, you can offer multi-tenant, self-service analytics. Plus, with a paid plan you’ll remove the “Powered by Metabase” footer on the charts.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |