5 ms·

Heroku is a perfectly valid solution. If you want to keep some of the auto-build PaaS benefits whilst containerizing for (any of) lower cost at scale, running

Heroku is a perfectly valid solution. If you want to keep some of the auto-build PaaS benefits whilst containerizing for (any of) lower cost at scale, running exactly the same app configuration in dev as in production, security, attaching services not available on Heroku, distribution to clients to run on their own cloud; then Docker does offer a nice solution - see gliderlabs/herokuish or redhat s2i for a familiar autobuild environment. And despite the one-size fits all dogma of some of the kubernetes crowd, there are many solutions to docker deployment and orchestration at different scales, especially if you're looking to retain most of the benefits of Heroku and its PaaS workflow; From the low end there's AWS Elastic Beanstalk multi-docker, flynn.io, docker swarm mode, AWS ECS and logistic sugar on top of that like Remind101/Empire, convox etc., before you get to PaaS-ish kubernetes behemoths like OpenShift or flavours of Cloud Foundry.

coredog64 8y ago
While Pivotal does have a k8s offering called PKS, it doesn't look like it's a full on PaaS. Instead it's just some BOSH magic that stands up all the VMs required to run k8s. PCF is their PaaS offering and doesn't as yet have a tight integration with k8s as a runtime.
- parasubvert 8y ago
  You’re right, here is some clarity PKS is part of PCF, PAS (Application Service) is the new name for the PaaS. The open source foundation has done the same inclusion (CFCR is the container runtime, aka Kubo, the CFAR is the app runtime). You can think of the Cloud Foundry foundation as focused on marketing and standardizing the application of these open source cloud technologies to business outcomes, whereas the CNCF is more of a tech advocacy foundation that is incubating a wider range of projects, sort of like an aspiring competitor to Apache. They’re complementary and it’s good we are all cooperating. There are a few initiatives within the CF community to replace Diego with k8s, but it’s not clear there is massive benefit in doing so - definitely some for operators who get more fine grained visibility and control, but the whole point of the PaaS is to enforce constraints and opinions, whereas K8s is much less opinionated. That said the transition will likely happen over the next while. Diego took a couple of years, maybe this will be quicker. Disclaimer, I’m a pivotal employee speaking for myself
  - jacques_chester 8y ago
    What I've noted elsewhere is that Kubernetes never really created clear boundaries between operators and developers. Cloud Foundry and Heroku do so with very clear boundaries. I think the open question for Project Eirini is whether a Cloud Foundry using Kubernetes as the container scheduler would expose it directly to developers. My expectation is that no, it wouldn't do so. Maybe some Kubernetes-land portals might be added (eg, Helm), but I suspect that Dr Julz has in mind to retain the `cf push` experience that's worked so well for so long. Disclosure: I am also a Pivotal employee. I speak for myself, to myself and at myself pretty much all the time.

coredog64 8y ago

While Pivotal does have a k8s offering called PKS, it doesn't look like it's a full on PaaS. Instead it's just some BOSH magic that stands up all the VMs required to run k8s. PCF is their PaaS offering and doesn't as yet have a tight integration with k8s as a runtime.

parasubvert 8y ago
You’re right, here is some clarity PKS is part of PCF, PAS (Application Service) is the new name for the PaaS. The open source foundation has done the same inclusion (CFCR is the container runtime, aka Kubo, the CFAR is the app runtime). You can think of the Cloud Foundry foundation as focused on marketing and standardizing the application of these open source cloud technologies to business outcomes, whereas the CNCF is more of a tech advocacy foundation that is incubating a wider range of projects, sort of like an aspiring competitor to Apache. They’re complementary and it’s good we are all cooperating. There are a few initiatives within the CF community to replace Diego with k8s, but it’s not clear there is massive benefit in doing so - definitely some for operators who get more fine grained visibility and control, but the whole point of the PaaS is to enforce constraints and opinions, whereas K8s is much less opinionated. That said the transition will likely happen over the next while. Diego took a couple of years, maybe this will be quicker. Disclaimer, I’m a pivotal employee speaking for myself
- jacques_chester 8y ago
  What I've noted elsewhere is that Kubernetes never really created clear boundaries between operators and developers. Cloud Foundry and Heroku do so with very clear boundaries. I think the open question for Project Eirini is whether a Cloud Foundry using Kubernetes as the container scheduler would expose it directly to developers. My expectation is that no, it wouldn't do so. Maybe some Kubernetes-land portals might be added (eg, Helm), but I suspect that Dr Julz has in mind to retain the `cf push` experience that's worked so well for so long. Disclosure: I am also a Pivotal employee. I speak for myself, to myself and at myself pretty much all the time.