I agree that many small businesses jump to Kube too early. If your entire app is a monolith and maybe a few supplementary services, then Kube is massive overkill.
But many people also tend to overlook all of the other benefits that suddenly become very easy to add when you already have Kube, such as a common way to collect logs and metrics, injecting instrumentation, autoscaling, automated certificate handling, automated DNS management, encrypting internal network traffic, deployment tools that practically works out of the box, and of course immutable declarative deployments.
Of course you can build all of this yourself, when you need it, but once you have the foundation up and running, it becomes quite easy to just add a helm chart and suddenly have a new capability.
In my opinion, when the company it big enough to need a dedicated ops team, then it’s big enough to benefit from Kube.
Something like heroku is better for out of the box stuff like logging and autoscaling. Some companies like banks have to have their own data center. But they should write their own “tools”.
Must be fun looking at 10 pods and pretending to be in control of Google search by proxy. Autists have a peculiar way of day dreaming, as they’re extremely limited in imagination. They always seek artificial complications to cover up the fact that what they’re doing is actually not far from trivial, and without gatekeeping a school kid would be capable of doing.
I’m not quite sure what you are getting at… Are you implying that I’m autistic because I only have 10 pods in a Kubernetes cluster?
Presently our clusters run roughly 1400 pods, and at this scale there certainly are benefits to using something like Kubernetes.
If your project is small enough to make sense on Heroku, then that’s awesome, but at some point Heroku stops making sense… both for managing at scale, and costs. Heroku already seems to be 2-4x as expensive as AWS on-demand. Presently we’re investigating moving out of AWS and into a datacenter, as it seems that we can reduce our costs by at least an order of magnitude.
No. I didn’t mean to attack you in particular in any way. I apologize if it came off as such. I just dislike the blind copying of what Google and Facebook do. Docker is another atrocity that everyone seems to feel obligated to use.
Heroku supports moderately large amounts of requests. It’s less expensive than having a proper sysops team in most cases.
With 1,400 it’s probably worth it to move away from AWS. Something like self-hosted Triton (descendant of Solaris) cluster would be far more elegant than kube and lxc.
Apology accepted, and thank you for not name calling.
And yeah, if you can save the ops team salaries by picking Heroku, then it certainly might offset the costs.
When you talk about Triton, do you mean this? Because funnily enough one of their bigger features seems to be that you can run Kubernetes on top of it. It looks pretty cool though, but I must say it was quite hard to find proper info on it.
Triton also seem to push for containerization quite heavily, and especially Docker… So when you talk about Triton are you suggesting to use the Infrastructure Containers or Virtual Machines instead?
Triton and SmartOS are still Sun Microsystems people. Solaris zones preceded Linux containers by almost a decade. They lost the popularity contest, so they have to provide compatibility with kube and docker. I think infrastructure containers are zones with extra whistles.
For even better performance, I’d go with Xen and Linux unikernel. The startup time can be just 1s with such minimum overhead. It also greatly reduces the attack surface. I highly doubt you’ll be allowed for such a drastic change though.
Fair. I hate kube though. Most companies run just 10 pods because they cargo cult google. The complexity of it is completely unjustified
The right tool for the right job.
I agree that many small businesses jump to Kube too early. If your entire app is a monolith and maybe a few supplementary services, then Kube is massive overkill.
But many people also tend to overlook all of the other benefits that suddenly become very easy to add when you already have Kube, such as a common way to collect logs and metrics, injecting instrumentation, autoscaling, automated certificate handling, automated DNS management, encrypting internal network traffic, deployment tools that practically works out of the box, and of course immutable declarative deployments.
Of course you can build all of this yourself, when you need it, but once you have the foundation up and running, it becomes quite easy to just add a helm chart and suddenly have a new capability.
In my opinion, when the company it big enough to need a dedicated ops team, then it’s big enough to benefit from Kube.
Something like heroku is better for out of the box stuff like logging and autoscaling. Some companies like banks have to have their own data center. But they should write their own “tools”.
Must be fun looking at 10 pods and pretending to be in control of Google search by proxy. Autists have a peculiar way of day dreaming, as they’re extremely limited in imagination. They always seek artificial complications to cover up the fact that what they’re doing is actually not far from trivial, and without gatekeeping a school kid would be capable of doing.
I’m not quite sure what you are getting at… Are you implying that I’m autistic because I only have 10 pods in a Kubernetes cluster?
Presently our clusters run roughly 1400 pods, and at this scale there certainly are benefits to using something like Kubernetes.
If your project is small enough to make sense on Heroku, then that’s awesome, but at some point Heroku stops making sense… both for managing at scale, and costs. Heroku already seems to be 2-4x as expensive as AWS on-demand. Presently we’re investigating moving out of AWS and into a datacenter, as it seems that we can reduce our costs by at least an order of magnitude.
No. I didn’t mean to attack you in particular in any way. I apologize if it came off as such. I just dislike the blind copying of what Google and Facebook do. Docker is another atrocity that everyone seems to feel obligated to use.
Heroku supports moderately large amounts of requests. It’s less expensive than having a proper sysops team in most cases.
With 1,400 it’s probably worth it to move away from AWS. Something like self-hosted Triton (descendant of Solaris) cluster would be far more elegant than kube and lxc.
Apology accepted, and thank you for not name calling.
And yeah, if you can save the ops team salaries by picking Heroku, then it certainly might offset the costs.
When you talk about Triton, do you mean this? Because funnily enough one of their bigger features seems to be that you can run Kubernetes on top of it. It looks pretty cool though, but I must say it was quite hard to find proper info on it.
Triton also seem to push for containerization quite heavily, and especially Docker… So when you talk about Triton are you suggesting to use the Infrastructure Containers or Virtual Machines instead?
Triton and SmartOS are still Sun Microsystems people. Solaris zones preceded Linux containers by almost a decade. They lost the popularity contest, so they have to provide compatibility with kube and docker. I think infrastructure containers are zones with extra whistles.
For even better performance, I’d go with Xen and Linux unikernel. The startup time can be just 1s with such minimum overhead. It also greatly reduces the attack surface. I highly doubt you’ll be allowed for such a drastic change though.