2 ms·
Our app was originally a single Node/Meteor app running on an Nginx server in AWS. We used shell scripts to deploy. "meteor build" was ran on each devs machine
by 013a 9y ago
Our app was originally a single Node/Meteor app running on an Nginx server in AWS. We used shell scripts to deploy. "meteor build" was ran on each devs machine when we wanted to deploy. We experimented with a small microservice running on a docker instance on EC2, then eventually moved to a Kops-provisioned EC2 cluster for everything.
We don't really have tremendous auto-scaling needs. But there are a few reasons why we did it.
We've since scaled to a small handful of services (frontend web app, backend node api, legacy stuff, custom deployments for high paying customers). We knew that standardizing on Docker was a good idea just to simplify the build process. What were previously service-specific, hard to maintain, hard to read, just weird shell scripts became a simple Dockerfile for each service, often only 5 or 6 lines long. Once you have that, setting up CI is ridiculously easy; AWS CodeBuild into ECS ECR took all of a day to implement. If we were on GCP it would have been even easier.
Comparatively, we'd spent longer than that actually maintaining the old scripts. The new ones require zero maintenance; they "just work", 100% of the time.
So we knew we wanted Docker. And that was a very good choice. No regrets. We start there. But once we had docker, our eyes turned to orchestration.
Its worth saying that there are a lot of nonobvious answers to questions in the "low/medium scale up devops" world. One big one we ran into early is "where do we store configuration?" Etcd or Consul are fine, but we're a pretty small shop; we didn't want to have to manage it ourselves. We could go with Compose or something. But, how do we get that configuration to the apps? We were in the process of writing new services and we wanted to follow 12-Factor and all that, so envvars make sense. But to get configuration from a remote source would break that, so we'd need some sort of hypervisor for the app to fetch that...
Additionally, how do you deploy? Let's say we go with a basic EC2 instance running Docker. We'd have to patch it together with shell scripts, ssh in, pull new images, GC old images (this was a huge problem with our "interim" step in the first paragraph, our EBS volumes filled up all the time, lots of manual work), restart, etc. Can you do that with zero downtime? Probably. More scripts...
Load balancing and HA? Yeah of course we can wire that up. More scripts. More CloudFormation templates or whatever...
Eventually you arrive at an inescapable conclusion: At a surprisingly low level of scale, you are reinventing Kube and Kube-like systems. So why not just use Kube? You get config management built in. You get a lot of deployment power in kubectl. You get auto-provisioning load balancers on AWS. You get everything.
And I could not be more serious when I say: It "just works". We've had two instances of random internal networking issues between our ingress controller and a service, which were resolved by restarting the ingress controller. That's... it, in a full year.
Like Docker before it, I think Kube is a foundational piece of technology that is only going to get more and more popular. Its incredible. But I do think that there is room in the market to make it easier to adopt. Best practices around internal configuration stuff is hard to come by; even something as simple as "I want a staging env, do i use two clusters or namespaces in one cluster" doesn't have a clear answer. Getting a local development environment cycle up and running is a pain in the ass. Monitoring and alerting is still pretty DIY; GCP solves some of this, but there's no turn-key alerting piece that I'm aware of. Logging is a nightmare if you are self-hosting, including on Kops; we ended up installing the Stackdriver agent and we use GCP for it, even though literally everything else in our stack is on AWS.
I literally don't believe there's a level of "production scale" your organization could be at where you wouldn't benefit from Kube. It is far far easier to set up than a bare deployment of anything if you do GKE. Connect Github to CI to Kube... good to go.