5 ms·

You probably don't need the cloud either, but everyone recognizes that it is a productivity gain. To me, this is the analogous case for K8s, you can probably d

You probably don't need the cloud either, but everyone recognizes that it is a productivity gain. To me, this is the analogous case for K8s, you can probably do the same with VMs, but everything is a lot more productive with containers and K8s.

cc81 8y ago
I don't have much practical experience with Kubernetes but I think one argument is that there are other alternatives to it that might give equal or better productivity gains for a lot of people. For example Azure App Service or equivalent from the other vendors. You don't have to manage a VM.
- slow_donkey 8y ago
  App service is alright but I'd recommend Heroku over app service any day. However, there is some visible work being done to improve app service like supporting docker compose files to run multiple containers but the basics are still very painful. Most notably, swapping servers (slots) always caused downtime, accessing logs was flaky and slow, azure interface is just plain slow, continuous deploy was flaky (or it just didn't kick in until 20 min later?) and I had to manually restart servers many times
bartread 8y ago
> You probably don't need the cloud either, but everyone recognizes that it is a productivity gain. Care to quantify that? Because we don't use the cloud (in fact, in my current role, we don't even make use of virtualisation for production infrastructure) and we have no issues with productivity. Or rather, let's be a little more honest, we have no issues with productivity that would be solved by a move to AWS/Azure/$_some_other_cloud_provider.
- outside1234 8y ago
  You forgot about all the folks managing / maintaining / cabling / air conditioning all your servers. That is the productivity gain you are missing.
  - jjeaff 8y ago
    I doubt they are running their own data center. Probably just renting dedicated boxes.
    - bartread 8y ago
      > Probably just renting dedicated boxes. Absolutely correct.
- mafro 8y ago
  Just because you "have no issues with productivity", doesn't necessarily mean that you couldn't be more productive. In my experience it takes a move to the cloud to actually see where those gains lie. Disclaimer: I have no idea about your actual real-life situation. This is vague and hand wavy on purpose.
  - bartread 8y ago
    > In my experience it takes a move to the cloud to actually see where those gains lie. Whilst I realise you were being vague on purpose, the above statement represents no kind of business justification.
    - mafro 8y ago
      Indeed it is not meant to be any kind of business justification - I clearly cannot comment your business and its needs :) In my experience of moving applications to the cloud, there are always folks who don't believe there is any gain to be made. These folks have always been wrong (so far!) I suppose I'm only commenting because I hate to see someone snub the potential of cloud. But hey I'm just some guy on HN.
      - bartread 8y ago
        The thing is, in previous positions we've used the cloud plenty, and it's been fine. But for what I'm doing now? No way. Just not the right fit. I therefore become extremely sceptical when people cite $unspecified_but_awesome_gains from switching.
        mafro 8y ago
        That's awesome. Can you elaborate more on your setup, and why cloud doesn't make sense? I'm really interested in cases like this.
jeffreyrogers 8y ago
I worked at a place that was deploying K8s as I was leaving and my experience was that K8s was complicated and no one knew exactly how to use it or why we should use it, other than it seemed to be what everyone else was doing. I didn't notice any operational improvements over our prior system (which was largely ad hoc), but the kinks may have been worked out by now.
- pm90 8y ago
  If you read the Innovators Dillemma, there is a very clear chapter about how new technologies don't really deliver their promises immediately; but as they're adopted and operators/users learn how to work with it, that's when productivity changes are very much visible. It took quite some time for AWS to be mainstream and then to be adopted and operated in a way that delivered high productivity gains, and it seems to be the same for k8s right now.
  - zaphirplane 8y ago
    I really wonder about the causality of that, is it changing things to adapt the new technology makes you clean up / refresh / fix known issues along the way or is it the new technology itself causes less issues down the track
    - pm90 8y ago
      That doesn't really make sense. If you're moving to a new technology, even if you clean up/refresh/ fix known issues along the way, you are likely to accumulate similar such issues in the new technology as well, which would lead to a decrease in productivity. But that has never really been observed. While I agree that the cleanup can inevitably lead to productivity gains, I believe they are overshadowed by the productivity gains from the actual change that is being made.
  - tannhaeuser 8y ago
    That only makes sense when seen as an obstacle to initial adoption from an innovators and sales point of view and could be said just about every innovation. But obviously not every IT innovation makes it.

cc81 8y ago

I don't have much practical experience with Kubernetes but I think one argument is that there are other alternatives to it that might give equal or better productivity gains for a lot of people. For example Azure App Service or equivalent from the other vendors. You don't have to manage a VM.

slow_donkey 8y ago
App service is alright but I'd recommend Heroku over app service any day. However, there is some visible work being done to improve app service like supporting docker compose files to run multiple containers but the basics are still very painful. Most notably, swapping servers (slots) always caused downtime, accessing logs was flaky and slow, azure interface is just plain slow, continuous deploy was flaky (or it just didn't kick in until 20 min later?) and I had to manually restart servers many times

bartread 8y ago

> You probably don't need the cloud either, but everyone recognizes that it is a productivity gain. Care to quantify that? Because we don't use the cloud (in fact, in my current role, we don't even make use of virtualisation for production infrastructure) and we have no issues with productivity. Or rather, let's be a little more honest, we have no issues with productivity that would be solved by a move to AWS/Azure/$_some_other_cloud_provider.

outside1234 8y ago
You forgot about all the folks managing / maintaining / cabling / air conditioning all your servers. That is the productivity gain you are missing.
- jjeaff 8y ago
  I doubt they are running their own data center. Probably just renting dedicated boxes.
  - bartread 8y ago
    > Probably just renting dedicated boxes. Absolutely correct.
mafro 8y ago
Just because you "have no issues with productivity", doesn't necessarily mean that you couldn't be more productive. In my experience it takes a move to the cloud to actually see where those gains lie. Disclaimer: I have no idea about your actual real-life situation. This is vague and hand wavy on purpose.
- bartread 8y ago
  > In my experience it takes a move to the cloud to actually see where those gains lie. Whilst I realise you were being vague on purpose, the above statement represents no kind of business justification.
  - mafro 8y ago
    Indeed it is not meant to be any kind of business justification - I clearly cannot comment your business and its needs :) In my experience of moving applications to the cloud, there are always folks who don't believe there is any gain to be made. These folks have always been wrong (so far!) I suppose I'm only commenting because I hate to see someone snub the potential of cloud. But hey I'm just some guy on HN.
    - bartread 8y ago
      The thing is, in previous positions we've used the cloud plenty, and it's been fine. But for what I'm doing now? No way. Just not the right fit. I therefore become extremely sceptical when people cite $unspecified_but_awesome_gains from switching.
      - mafro 8y ago
        That's awesome. Can you elaborate more on your setup, and why cloud doesn't make sense? I'm really interested in cases like this.

jeffreyrogers 8y ago

I worked at a place that was deploying K8s as I was leaving and my experience was that K8s was complicated and no one knew exactly how to use it or why we should use it, other than it seemed to be what everyone else was doing. I didn't notice any operational improvements over our prior system (which was largely ad hoc), but the kinks may have been worked out by now.

pm90 8y ago
If you read the Innovators Dillemma, there is a very clear chapter about how new technologies don't really deliver their promises immediately; but as they're adopted and operators/users learn how to work with it, that's when productivity changes are very much visible. It took quite some time for AWS to be mainstream and then to be adopted and operated in a way that delivered high productivity gains, and it seems to be the same for k8s right now.
- zaphirplane 8y ago
  I really wonder about the causality of that, is it changing things to adapt the new technology makes you clean up / refresh / fix known issues along the way or is it the new technology itself causes less issues down the track
  - pm90 8y ago
    That doesn't really make sense. If you're moving to a new technology, even if you clean up/refresh/ fix known issues along the way, you are likely to accumulate similar such issues in the new technology as well, which would lead to a decrease in productivity. But that has never really been observed. While I agree that the cleanup can inevitably lead to productivity gains, I believe they are overshadowed by the productivity gains from the actual change that is being made.
- tannhaeuser 8y ago
  That only makes sense when seen as an obstacle to initial adoption from an innovators and sales point of view and could be said just about every innovation. But obviously not every IT innovation makes it.