4 ms·
I'm in the same boat opting for docker-compose instead. docker-compose is much simpler to manage. Obviously it doesn't have feature parity with k8s but docker-c
by mmgutz 6y ago
I'm in the same boat opting for docker-compose instead. docker-compose is much simpler to manage. Obviously it doesn't have feature parity with k8s but docker-compose does the basics well.
An inexpensive VPS runs compose well with more resources at a lower cost than the managed costs of k8s.
- threeseed 6y agoI don't understand this comment at all. Kubernetes is designed for a cluster of nodes not a single one. Of course a single VPS is lower cost and easier to use but what happens if you want a second or third. Or any form of redundancy.
- j4ah4n 6y agoI presume they are using docker swarm in this instance.
- imtringued 6y agoYou just run scp with the compose file and run docker compose down; docker compose up Bonus points if you just mount the compose file on an NFS share. I've wasted enough man months on kubernetes that unless you tell me to manage 1000 nodes this approach will never cost me more time than the time I spent using and learning kubernetes.
- temptemptemp111 6y agodocker-compose.yml on an NFS share? What's the benefit? Or you mean sharing the files between containers?
- folmar 6y agoA lot of people use it for deployment standard and don't care about multinode.
- temptemptemp111 6y agoAgreed. Good support for compose currently, and swarm is usually overkill. With a bit more elegant HA functionality, docker-compose could be the go-to for many more. The comment below claiming he doesn't understand your comment reminds me of all of those who will say "well its not FOR production" - seems more like superstition than science.