5 ms·

Been waiting for this for... 7 months now since its announcement at ReInvent? My initial impressions are very negative. What even is the point of this? The clu

by 013a 8y ago

Been waiting for this for... 7 months now since its announcement at ReInvent? My initial impressions are very negative. What even is the point of this? The clusters themselves do nothing, they're just a control plane you pay $144/month for. You need to add nodes from CloudFormation? Is there any integration at all with CodeBuild/CodeDeploy/CodePipeline? No mention anywhere of Ingress... I sure hope that's built in, but from what I'm reading it isn't? What was Amazon thinking by releasing this so unfinished?

jrs95 8y ago
In the launch video they asked about Ingress and it's apparently a work in progress.
- kraig 8y ago
  AWS is taking over the ALB ingress controller that was developed for Ticketmaster with CoreOS. See SIG meeting nodes from the 1st: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-i0xQidlXnFEP9fXHWkBxqySkXwJnrGJP9OGyP2_P14/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-i0xQidlXnFEP9fXHWkBxqyS...
CSDude 8y ago
Do you think management nodes are free? Master nodes need to run etcd+kube api. These master nodes are multi region available with HA configured, which will be expensive even if you use smaller instances yourself. Google might be free but if you are already in AWS and do not want to manage Kubernetes masters at all and treat your worker nodes like cattle, it is a very nice and enough solution. What integration do you need? The good thing about EKS is that it is CNCF Conformant Kubernetes, meaning anything works with upstream Kubernetes works here, including ingress controllers that already work with both ALB and ELB+Nginx. I am not defending Amazon, most of their managed services suck and very slow, but both preview and GA experience of EKS was great and enough for me.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  If management nodes run in containers themselves (managed on AWS VMs), I’d assume a lower cost than what it’d cost to run them on VMs in AWS. Is questioning the cost of a product not a fair question?
- derefr 8y ago
  > Do you think management nodes are free? ... Google['s management nodes] might be free Indeed they are. Why do you think that is? It could be that they're a great big loss-leader for GKE, or that the costs of GKE management nodes are amortized into the per-cluster-node costs. But neither of these seem to be true. (The pricing of GKE management nodes before they made them free was negligible; and GKE nodes don't cost any more than equivalent GCE nodes.) The real answer, I think, is that K8s management nodes really are just not all that big a deal to run. Certainly not $144/mo of a big deal.
  - puzzle 8y ago
    Last time I checked, Google's public renewable energy footprint was 2x Amazon's, as a proximate for the actual footprint, so it's not that crazy to imagine that there are plenty of slack resources to run small VMs or even Borg tasks for these masters.
    - manigandham 8y ago
      AWS is 10x larger than GCP so power and compute capacity are really not the issue here, especially for a product that just launched. There's also no reason AWS couldn't adopt the same lightweight kubernetes master processes that GKE uses after all this time.
      - yebyen 8y ago
        > public renewable energy footprint When electricity is the sole marginal cost of keeping a node powered up from your pool of available machines that can be powered on and off on-demand, these particular words actually mean a lot. I think the point is that GCP can afford to keep some nodes online even when they don't belong to anyone and just eat the cost. (Eg. those renewable resources like wind and the sun just don't cost anything, so why not spend the energy that is generated from them.) I'm sure I'm not giving AWS enough credit. Seeing that Google pretty much invented Kubernetes, their cost to come 'up to speed' enough to provide a managed version of it is effectively nil. Their renewable energy is not the only source of so-called "extra capacity," either... they honestly should have had no trouble staffing a team to build out and promote GKE without siphoning off much more than a nominal amount of developer capacity from other offerings that may need it as well. If it's true that when AWS announced they'd be offering EKS last November, they only had a team of 5 allocated to it, then I guess they deserve a lot of credit for the progress they've made in about 8 months. That cost to AWS is non-zero (I'm also pretty sure the team has grown and is larger than 5 devs now) and they have every reasonable basis to attempt to recoup it. I don't think many AWS customers will disagree. The adopters who have known they need it for a year or more, many who are happily locked into the ecosystem already, will certainly be lining up to pay for this now.
puzzle 8y ago
The rumor at Kubecon (in December, right after re:Invent) was that at the time there were only five people working on EKS, so you shouldn't have expected much. Thus, even if the team grew in the meantime, and it must have, you can't expect a solid product before at least the end of 2018. Waiting one year from announcement before adopting a brand new AWS product seems to be a reasonable rule of thumb.
- flurdy 8y ago
  That will be a 2 pizza team, the normal team size in AWS? I would have thought they would add more teams focusing on different parts of EKS though.
yebyen 8y ago
Just guessing, I think they were thinking, "We'd better put something out there in GA before Azure/AKS does. We're already late to the party." Maybe they actually don't think of that at all... I'm very skeptical of that.
jfk92n8 8y ago
Because people will pay for it and stick with AWS if SOMETHING is happening, rather than move Google or Azure All the talk here about start small and grow But somehow the big guys are supposed to push the final version of $newthing out Day-1? They might have the resources but it’s the economics for new thing don’t change
skywhopper 8y ago
This I my impression as well. It’s the thinnest possible layer of service integration with what basically amounts to demo templates for everything else. This is NOT a managed service. Nothing close. I expected something much more self contained. Anyone looking to run K8s at scale on AWS May as well just do it themselves. This doesn’t buy you anything except locking into what versions AWS can manage to support.
all_usernames 8y ago
EKS may be appealing for a shop that has AWS expertise, automation, and monitoring set-up already and that doesn't necessarily want to manage a completely different stack for k8s. EKS has some form of integration with IAM, EBS, ALB, Route53, CloudWatch, etc. As to 'unfinished', this is the usual model for AWS. New services are initially very simple and rich features and integrations are added over time. It's been that way for ten years. ECS didn't even support running multiple container ports per instances when it was released!

by 013a 8y ago

jrs95 8y ago

In the launch video they asked about Ingress and it's apparently a work in progress.

kraig 8y ago
AWS is taking over the ALB ingress controller that was developed for Ticketmaster with CoreOS. See SIG meeting nodes from the 1st: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-i0xQidlXnFEP9fXHWkBxqySkXwJnrGJP9OGyP2_P14/edit https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-i0xQidlXnFEP9fXHWkBxqyS...

CSDude 8y ago

Do you think management nodes are free? Master nodes need to run etcd+kube api. These master nodes are multi region available with HA configured, which will be expensive even if you use smaller instances yourself. Google might be free but if you are already in AWS and do not want to manage Kubernetes masters at all and treat your worker nodes like cattle, it is a very nice and enough solution. What integration do you need? The good thing about EKS is that it is CNCF Conformant Kubernetes, meaning anything works with upstream Kubernetes works here, including ingress controllers that already work with both ALB and ELB+Nginx. I am not defending Amazon, most of their managed services suck and very slow, but both preview and GA experience of EKS was great and enough for me.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
If management nodes run in containers themselves (managed on AWS VMs), I’d assume a lower cost than what it’d cost to run them on VMs in AWS. Is questioning the cost of a product not a fair question?
derefr 8y ago
> Do you think management nodes are free? ... Google['s management nodes] might be free Indeed they are. Why do you think that is? It could be that they're a great big loss-leader for GKE, or that the costs of GKE management nodes are amortized into the per-cluster-node costs. But neither of these seem to be true. (The pricing of GKE management nodes before they made them free was negligible; and GKE nodes don't cost any more than equivalent GCE nodes.) The real answer, I think, is that K8s management nodes really are just not all that big a deal to run. Certainly not $144/mo of a big deal.
- puzzle 8y ago
  Last time I checked, Google's public renewable energy footprint was 2x Amazon's, as a proximate for the actual footprint, so it's not that crazy to imagine that there are plenty of slack resources to run small VMs or even Borg tasks for these masters.
  - manigandham 8y ago
    AWS is 10x larger than GCP so power and compute capacity are really not the issue here, especially for a product that just launched. There's also no reason AWS couldn't adopt the same lightweight kubernetes master processes that GKE uses after all this time.
    - yebyen 8y ago
      > public renewable energy footprint When electricity is the sole marginal cost of keeping a node powered up from your pool of available machines that can be powered on and off on-demand, these particular words actually mean a lot. I think the point is that GCP can afford to keep some nodes online even when they don't belong to anyone and just eat the cost. (Eg. those renewable resources like wind and the sun just don't cost anything, so why not spend the energy that is generated from them.) I'm sure I'm not giving AWS enough credit. Seeing that Google pretty much invented Kubernetes, their cost to come 'up to speed' enough to provide a managed version of it is effectively nil. Their renewable energy is not the only source of so-called "extra capacity," either... they honestly should have had no trouble staffing a team to build out and promote GKE without siphoning off much more than a nominal amount of developer capacity from other offerings that may need it as well. If it's true that when AWS announced they'd be offering EKS last November, they only had a team of 5 allocated to it, then I guess they deserve a lot of credit for the progress they've made in about 8 months. That cost to AWS is non-zero (I'm also pretty sure the team has grown and is larger than 5 devs now) and they have every reasonable basis to attempt to recoup it. I don't think many AWS customers will disagree. The adopters who have known they need it for a year or more, many who are happily locked into the ecosystem already, will certainly be lining up to pay for this now.

puzzle 8y ago

The rumor at Kubecon (in December, right after re:Invent) was that at the time there were only five people working on EKS, so you shouldn't have expected much. Thus, even if the team grew in the meantime, and it must have, you can't expect a solid product before at least the end of 2018. Waiting one year from announcement before adopting a brand new AWS product seems to be a reasonable rule of thumb.

flurdy 8y ago
That will be a 2 pizza team, the normal team size in AWS? I would have thought they would add more teams focusing on different parts of EKS though.

yebyen 8y ago

Just guessing, I think they were thinking, "We'd better put something out there in GA before Azure/AKS does. We're already late to the party." Maybe they actually don't think of that at all... I'm very skeptical of that.

jfk92n8 8y ago

Because people will pay for it and stick with AWS if SOMETHING is happening, rather than move Google or Azure All the talk here about start small and grow But somehow the big guys are supposed to push the final version of $newthing out Day-1? They might have the resources but it’s the economics for new thing don’t change

skywhopper 8y ago

This I my impression as well. It’s the thinnest possible layer of service integration with what basically amounts to demo templates for everything else. This is NOT a managed service. Nothing close. I expected something much more self contained. Anyone looking to run K8s at scale on AWS May as well just do it themselves. This doesn’t buy you anything except locking into what versions AWS can manage to support.

all_usernames 8y ago

EKS may be appealing for a shop that has AWS expertise, automation, and monitoring set-up already and that doesn't necessarily want to manage a completely different stack for k8s. EKS has some form of integration with IAM, EBS, ALB, Route53, CloudWatch, etc. As to 'unfinished', this is the usual model for AWS. New services are initially very simple and rich features and integrations are added over time. It's been that way for ten years. ECS didn't even support running multiple container ports per instances when it was released!