9 ms·

I recently reached out to Mesosphere to better understand the value and options available to my company if we switched to Mesos (and thus Mesosphere). We curren

I recently reached out to Mesosphere to better understand the value and options available to my company if we switched to Mesos (and thus Mesosphere). We currently run Kubernetes across all major cloud providers and we'd like some help. I was startled by how dogmatic they are about their pricing model: per node, annually. Our entire business model is running dynamically scaling data pipelines for companies. We spin nodes up and down programmatically based on a pipeline's history and a dozen other factors. I had a lot of back and forth with them and eventually their CFO and they just could not understand the concept of a "node hour" or anything of the like. Eventually, it was determined if we paid the per-node annual price for our "average" (completely different story, but they calculated this about as wrong as you could have) usage and we went our separate ways. The product seems really cool but as someone who runs a company that easily spin up thousands of nodes in the middle of the night for (for a grand total of $40/hr on GKE...) this pricing model just seems antiquated. I imagine that all companies will be driving their usage to this practice in due time. I really hope to see the industry change.

CoffeeDregs 9y ago
Had an interesting pricing experience with them a couple of years ago. We were happy with our Mesos/Marathon cluster of ~100-200 machines but needed some acute support and we were in the same investment fund of DCVC. Got on the phone with ... Sales... No problem; you're a friend of ours because of DCVC; we'll get you special, friendly pricing on DC/OS... Got an email a few hours late: $100,000 per year. Was fairly puzzled. Two hours later, I got another email correcting the prior price: the special, friendly price was now $150,000 per year. We migrated to AWS ECS and all was well.
- pivotalpoint415 9y ago
  A lot of software vendors charge $X,000 / server / year in subscription fees. Redhat charges > $10,000 per physical server for their OpenShift and Pivotal gets for 100s of nodes often 7-figures. Remember just how much VMWare costs...
pnathan 9y ago
I was examining a Mesosphere deployment a few years ago and also found the pricing model to be difficult in a cloud environment, but the salesperson I spoke with seemed more clueful than your description. We chose to go otherwise for a variety of reasons. Today, I think I would probably suggest to a Serious Company with a fully staffed ops/sre/devops team to run a pure Mesos play for the data systems with k8s on top or side by side for web systems.
rectang 9y ago
> Mesos (and thus Mesosphere) Mesos is an open source project. Would you consider any other vendors besides Mesosphere?
- don71 9y ago
  DC/OS is also open source. What are your concerns with it?
  - rectang 9y ago
    Mesos is an Apache project. (DC/OS is not.) Apache projects are required to be vendor-neutral. That's part of the covenant under which contributors participate. The Apache governance model provides opportunities for competing vendors, so besides Mesosphere, the market is open for other players to provide Mesos support.
  - trengrj 9y ago
    Components aren't open source. Still waiting for the new hdfs package to be released see https://github.com/mesosphere/hdfs-deprecated/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/mesosphere/hdfs-deprecated/blob/master/RE...
    - tknaup 9y ago
      The new package is here: http://universe.dcos.io/#/package/beta-hdfs/version/latest http://universe.dcos.io/#/package/beta-hdfs/version/latest
      - trengrj 9y ago
        Yes the package is available but as far as I can see not open source yet.
        spahl 9y ago
        Here it is: https://github.com/mesosphere/dcos-commons/tree/master/frameworks/hdfs https://github.com/mesosphere/dcos-commons/tree/master/frame...
wmf 9y ago
This makes sense if DC/OS is targeted exclusively at on-prem.
jacques_chester 9y ago
Disclosure: I work for Pivotal, which competes with Mesosphere in this arena. Read with discretion. If shilling persists, consult your techcrunch. With that out of the way: you should try Kubo. Google & Pivotal have been working on Kubo[0] to make the management of Kubernetes easier by using BOSH as the deployment/update/repair system. You make deployments by editing a yaml file. Or, better yet, but having a tool edit the file for you as part of a structured CI/CD pipeline (I've seen both and I am a fan of the latter). BOSH works at the IaaS layer. Insofar as you mean "spin up and down VMs", Kubo is well-suited for that exact problem. You also get a bunch of upgrade and self-healing stuff for free. Pivotal is also adding a commercial offering based on Kubo, PKS[1], which has been built with Google[2] and VMWare[3]. You might not need it for your exact usecase; the sweetspot is Pivotal Cloud Foundry users who want a relatively seamless side-by-side integration between CF and k8s. There's a bunch of value-added features (Harbor, GCP service brokers), of course, plus the whole throat-to-choke thing people like to pay for. The pricing model isn't set in stone, but I suspect it will settle in the vicinity of what you have in mind. Our DNA is charging per-instance for Cloud Foundry apps, rather than worrying about sockets or RAM or other metrics which only poorly correlate to user value. Anyway, I can hook you up with Kubo or PKS folk. Email me: jchester@pivotal.io [0] https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/kubo-deployment https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/kubo-deployment [1] https://pivotal.io/pks https://pivotal.io/pks [2] https://www.blog.google/topics/google-cloud/vmware-and-pivotal-launch-new-hybrid-kubernetes-solution-optimized-gcp/ https://www.blog.google/topics/google-cloud/vmware-and-pivot... [3] https://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/2017/08/29/vmware-pivotal-container-service/ https://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/2017/08/29/vmware-pivot...
- jdc0589 9y ago
  I'm gonna check kubo out, cause its REALLY relevant to me in the coming months. Can you comment any why kubo might be preferable to something like kops? You are probably aware of this, but people are starting to get a little fatigued from amount of automated ops/deploy tooling out there for k8s. Don't get me wrong, this is an area that needs improvement so competition is totally necessary, but its starting to become a bit difficult to navigate the landscape, or even keep up with the best choices.

CoffeeDregs 9y ago

Had an interesting pricing experience with them a couple of years ago. We were happy with our Mesos/Marathon cluster of ~100-200 machines but needed some acute support and we were in the same investment fund of DCVC. Got on the phone with ... Sales... No problem; you're a friend of ours because of DCVC; we'll get you special, friendly pricing on DC/OS... Got an email a few hours late: $100,000 per year. Was fairly puzzled. Two hours later, I got another email correcting the prior price: the special, friendly price was now $150,000 per year. We migrated to AWS ECS and all was well.

pivotalpoint415 9y ago
A lot of software vendors charge $X,000 / server / year in subscription fees. Redhat charges > $10,000 per physical server for their OpenShift and Pivotal gets for 100s of nodes often 7-figures. Remember just how much VMWare costs...

pnathan 9y ago

I was examining a Mesosphere deployment a few years ago and also found the pricing model to be difficult in a cloud environment, but the salesperson I spoke with seemed more clueful than your description. We chose to go otherwise for a variety of reasons. Today, I think I would probably suggest to a Serious Company with a fully staffed ops/sre/devops team to run a pure Mesos play for the data systems with k8s on top or side by side for web systems.

rectang 9y ago

> Mesos (and thus Mesosphere) Mesos is an open source project. Would you consider any other vendors besides Mesosphere?

don71 9y ago
DC/OS is also open source. What are your concerns with it?
- rectang 9y ago
  Mesos is an Apache project. (DC/OS is not.) Apache projects are required to be vendor-neutral. That's part of the covenant under which contributors participate. The Apache governance model provides opportunities for competing vendors, so besides Mesosphere, the market is open for other players to provide Mesos support.
- trengrj 9y ago
  Components aren't open source. Still waiting for the new hdfs package to be released see https://github.com/mesosphere/hdfs-deprecated/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/mesosphere/hdfs-deprecated/blob/master/RE...
  - tknaup 9y ago
    The new package is here: http://universe.dcos.io/#/package/beta-hdfs/version/latest http://universe.dcos.io/#/package/beta-hdfs/version/latest
    - trengrj 9y ago
      Yes the package is available but as far as I can see not open source yet.
      - spahl 9y ago
        Here it is: https://github.com/mesosphere/dcos-commons/tree/master/frameworks/hdfs https://github.com/mesosphere/dcos-commons/tree/master/frame...

wmf 9y ago

This makes sense if DC/OS is targeted exclusively at on-prem.

jacques_chester 9y ago

Disclosure: I work for Pivotal, which competes with Mesosphere in this arena. Read with discretion. If shilling persists, consult your techcrunch. With that out of the way: you should try Kubo. Google & Pivotal have been working on Kubo[0] to make the management of Kubernetes easier by using BOSH as the deployment/update/repair system. You make deployments by editing a yaml file. Or, better yet, but having a tool edit the file for you as part of a structured CI/CD pipeline (I've seen both and I am a fan of the latter). BOSH works at the IaaS layer. Insofar as you mean "spin up and down VMs", Kubo is well-suited for that exact problem. You also get a bunch of upgrade and self-healing stuff for free. Pivotal is also adding a commercial offering based on Kubo, PKS[1], which has been built with Google[2] and VMWare[3]. You might not need it for your exact usecase; the sweetspot is Pivotal Cloud Foundry users who want a relatively seamless side-by-side integration between CF and k8s. There's a bunch of value-added features (Harbor, GCP service brokers), of course, plus the whole throat-to-choke thing people like to pay for. The pricing model isn't set in stone, but I suspect it will settle in the vicinity of what you have in mind. Our DNA is charging per-instance for Cloud Foundry apps, rather than worrying about sockets or RAM or other metrics which only poorly correlate to user value. Anyway, I can hook you up with Kubo or PKS folk. Email me: jchester@pivotal.io [0] https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/kubo-deployment https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/kubo-deployment [1] https://pivotal.io/pks https://pivotal.io/pks [2] https://www.blog.google/topics/google-cloud/vmware-and-pivotal-launch-new-hybrid-kubernetes-solution-optimized-gcp/ https://www.blog.google/topics/google-cloud/vmware-and-pivot... [3] https://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/2017/08/29/vmware-pivotal-container-service/ https://blogs.vmware.com/cloudnative/2017/08/29/vmware-pivot...

jdc0589 9y ago
I'm gonna check kubo out, cause its REALLY relevant to me in the coming months. Can you comment any why kubo might be preferable to something like kops? You are probably aware of this, but people are starting to get a little fatigued from amount of automated ops/deploy tooling out there for k8s. Don't get me wrong, this is an area that needs improvement so competition is totally necessary, but its starting to become a bit difficult to navigate the landscape, or even keep up with the best choices.