3 ms·

> You can do load balancing and all the other things k8s does Nomad can do many of the things that k8s does, and even some things that k8s can't, but it does n

> You can do load balancing and all the other things k8s does Nomad can do many of the things that k8s does, and even some things that k8s can't, but it does not do all the things that k8s does. For example, nomad doesn't have network policies. Also, just to approach the base level of functionality and security in k8s you need to setup consul as well and bootstrap all the tls stuff, and at that point it's not much more work to get k8s going. Nomad is pretty cool, and is rapidly catching up to k8s, it will be interesting to see what happens in the long run.

zie 8y ago
Yes, True enough. Arguably, network policies are outside of Nomad's scope. It's a resource scheduler. Nomad doesn't turn up interfaces for you, or do routing of IP traffic. Nomad is not a one-stop shop, like k8s tries to be, it does resource scheduling in a nice declarative manner, that's about it. It's much more in the unix toolset philosophy, let 1 tool do 1 thing well, and make integration as painless as possible. k8s is much more in-line with the systemd way of thinking, it owns all the things and can be the only shiny in the room. I'm not sure I'd agree that turning up k8s is as easy as turning up consul, nomad and vault. K8s in my experience tends to require lots of babysitting. Consul can require some babysitting, but vault and nomad require basically no babysitting, except the occasional, mostly painless upgrade. For me it's really about operational simplicity. I have to keep this stuff running tomorrow and next year. Shiny, super-fast moving be all and do all stuff like k8s, Openstack, etc tend to be a giant pain that requires loads of babysitting(most notably at upgrade time), as the edge cases tend to hurt a lot, when you hit them.
- justinsaccount 8y ago
  I don't really see how nomad is operationally simpler than k8s. To run a service behind something like traefik on k8s I would: bootstrap a CA for cluster tls run etcd run k8s (apiserver,etc,kubelets) run your application run the traefik ingress controller To run a service behind something like traefik on nomad you would: bootstrap a CA for cluster tls run consul run nomad (servers, clients) run your application run traefik somehow I think the only thing that is really more complicated in k8s is the networking stuff, but that's only because it has more features, like having cluster dns automatically configured and being able to give every pod its own ip address which means every service can bind to port 80 without conflicts, and policy enforcement.
  - zie 8y ago
    We are talking about different things. I'm talking about keeping Kubernetes/Nomad alive and breathing and happy. The ops part of devops. You are talking about running stuff under them. I agree they are similar in running applications under them. Operationally simple: * 1 binary, for both servers and agents. * 1 config file. For consul & nomad 2 config files. * Upgrades are simple, bring down a node, replace binary, start it back up. Docs are straightforward, it's easy to understand how Nomad works it's not complicated, you can get your head around the server/agent split and nodes and everything in an hour probably (for both nomad AND consul). k8s is a very complex beast, with many, many binaries and configs, there are helpers that get you setup, but they all have their own pros and cons, and sharp edges. Chances are you would not want to use a helper in a production setup, which means you have to understand all those moving parts. Keeping a k8s cluster running nicely and upgraded consistently requires many full-time admins. Keeping a nomad cluster running requires very little work(I do it part time, maybe an hour a month on a busy month). Arguably for dev/testing under consul & nomad, you would do this: consul agent -dev & nomad agent -dev & nomad run myapp.nomad nomad run traefik.nomad Adding vault to the mix for secrets: vault server -dev & For production use it's obviously more involved, but most of that is just around understanding your operational requirements and getting them working with nomad, not really about nomad itself.
    - justinsaccount 8y ago
      No, I'm talking about operationally too. If your consul and nomad deployments are only one binary and one config file then you're not using TLS . Half the effort of setting k8s up is bootstrapping the CA and certs for etcd and the k8s components > k8s is a very complex beast, with many, many binaries and configs Because it's much more in the unix toolset philosophy, let 1 tool do 1 thing well. Is that a bad thing now? hyperkube does put all the server side components in a single binary, there's still a bit of configuration though. A lot of the options are repetitive, I bet one could wrap hyperkube with a single config file and some defaults and the end result would look a like like nomad.
      - zie 8y ago

zie 8y ago

Yes, True enough. Arguably, network policies are outside of Nomad's scope. It's a resource scheduler. Nomad doesn't turn up interfaces for you, or do routing of IP traffic. Nomad is not a one-stop shop, like k8s tries to be, it does resource scheduling in a nice declarative manner, that's about it. It's much more in the unix toolset philosophy, let 1 tool do 1 thing well, and make integration as painless as possible. k8s is much more in-line with the systemd way of thinking, it owns all the things and can be the only shiny in the room. I'm not sure I'd agree that turning up k8s is as easy as turning up consul, nomad and vault. K8s in my experience tends to require lots of babysitting. Consul can require some babysitting, but vault and nomad require basically no babysitting, except the occasional, mostly painless upgrade. For me it's really about operational simplicity. I have to keep this stuff running tomorrow and next year. Shiny, super-fast moving be all and do all stuff like k8s, Openstack, etc tend to be a giant pain that requires loads of babysitting(most notably at upgrade time), as the edge cases tend to hurt a lot, when you hit them.

justinsaccount 8y ago
I don't really see how nomad is operationally simpler than k8s. To run a service behind something like traefik on k8s I would: bootstrap a CA for cluster tls run etcd run k8s (apiserver,etc,kubelets) run your application run the traefik ingress controller To run a service behind something like traefik on nomad you would: bootstrap a CA for cluster tls run consul run nomad (servers, clients) run your application run traefik somehow I think the only thing that is really more complicated in k8s is the networking stuff, but that's only because it has more features, like having cluster dns automatically configured and being able to give every pod its own ip address which means every service can bind to port 80 without conflicts, and policy enforcement.
- zie 8y ago
  We are talking about different things. I'm talking about keeping Kubernetes/Nomad alive and breathing and happy. The ops part of devops. You are talking about running stuff under them. I agree they are similar in running applications under them. Operationally simple: * 1 binary, for both servers and agents. * 1 config file. For consul & nomad 2 config files. * Upgrades are simple, bring down a node, replace binary, start it back up. Docs are straightforward, it's easy to understand how Nomad works it's not complicated, you can get your head around the server/agent split and nodes and everything in an hour probably (for both nomad AND consul). k8s is a very complex beast, with many, many binaries and configs, there are helpers that get you setup, but they all have their own pros and cons, and sharp edges. Chances are you would not want to use a helper in a production setup, which means you have to understand all those moving parts. Keeping a k8s cluster running nicely and upgraded consistently requires many full-time admins. Keeping a nomad cluster running requires very little work(I do it part time, maybe an hour a month on a busy month). Arguably for dev/testing under consul & nomad, you would do this: consul agent -dev & nomad agent -dev & nomad run myapp.nomad nomad run traefik.nomad Adding vault to the mix for secrets: vault server -dev & For production use it's obviously more involved, but most of that is just around understanding your operational requirements and getting them working with nomad, not really about nomad itself.
  - justinsaccount 8y ago
    No, I'm talking about operationally too. If your consul and nomad deployments are only one binary and one config file then you're not using TLS . Half the effort of setting k8s up is bootstrapping the CA and certs for etcd and the k8s components > k8s is a very complex beast, with many, many binaries and configs Because it's much more in the unix toolset philosophy, let 1 tool do 1 thing well. Is that a bad thing now? hyperkube does put all the server side components in a single binary, there's still a bit of configuration though. A lot of the options are repetitive, I bet one could wrap hyperkube with a single config file and some defaults and the end result would look a like like nomad.
    - zie 8y ago