3 ms·

Sure, but the context here is > Kubernetes Is a Surprisingly Affordable Platform for Personal Projects with a counter that > They're Google wannabies that th

Sure, but the context here is > Kubernetes Is a Surprisingly Affordable Platform for Personal Projects with a counter that > They're Google wannabies that thinks in Google's scale but forget that it is utterly unnecessary in their case. I would posit that at the point you have over a hundred (or a couple hundred) servers, that "Google wannabies" applies much less and you have reason to use the Kubernetes features. But I wouldn't expect most personal projects to get anywhere near that threshold. Hell, I bet the vast majority of personal projects happily sit on one server that does all their needs and they have room to grow on that server, or a larger instance of the one server. Possibly a second one spun up occasionally for specialized processing needs until it's destroyed.

SEJeff 8y ago
And in this, we're entirely in agreement! I run my personal web stuff in a docker container per application (running as a dedicated user per app via docker's --user=username:group) which iptables rules per user. Kubernetes would work, but is overkill for the 5 vhosts I run via a pretty stripped down Apache config.
snaky 8y ago
I won't use the term 'vast majority' to stay conservative, but the many, many of enterprise projects would happily work on one server (well, let's make it two identical servers, for redundancy and HA). You can get 2U server with 1,5 TB of RAM, dozens of NVMe drives and tens of cores for really cheap nowadays.