4 ms·

There's a blog post as well. I'm unsure what makes for the most relevant link: https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/announcing-general-availability-of-hashicorp-nomad

There's a blog post as well. I'm unsure what makes for the most relevant link: https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/announcing-general-availability-of-hashicorp-nomad-1-0 https://www.hashicorp.com/blog/announcing-general-availabili... I'm the Nomad Team Engineering Lead and would be happy to answer any questions people might have.

gavinray 6y ago
I'm a big fan conceptually of Nomad, and I love the streams that the Nomad team does to talk about development and answer questions. My only comments would be: I wish there was more content available (maybe on HashiCorp Learn Nomad) for working with single-instance Nomad clusters. And a demo of realworld dev-to-prod workflow. Something like "Okay here's a local Docker Compose setup with Postgres, a backend API, and a frontend web app, and here's the workflow for getting it into production with Nomad."
- schmichael 6y ago
  Thanks that's great feedback and you're not alone in that desire. We do "small" users a pretty big disservice by effectively dismissing single-server deployments and jumping straight to "real" production deployments (3+ servers distinct from the nodes that run workloads). We have people who use Nomad locally as a systemd alternative. We have people who use single-scheduler-multiple-nodes clusters at home or at work, and it works quite well! If the scheduler crashes, work continues to run uninterrupted, so there's little reason not to start small and scale up. The problem is largely that it's tricky to separate out and accurately address these various personas. People looking for a systemd alternative are obviously highly technical and will likely figure everything out through experimentation. However, "small" cluster users need to be carefully educated on the differences between an HA cluster (3+ schedulers) and a single scheduler cluster. Not only that, but we would need to automate testing for each of these recommendations to ensure changes don't break an official recommendation.
  - gavinray 6y ago
    Yeah, I mean also from a financial/business standpoint I totally get it. The incentive is to target content efforts towards enterprise and large-scale orgs. Because who cares if the indie dev or small startup is running your stack, let's be real.
  - ngrilly 6y ago
    I’d be happy to know more about the single node use case. I considered Nomad in the past for this, but it seemed optimized for a cluster, and I ended up using Docker Swarm instead.
    - tpetry 6y ago
      Same for me, i did stick to docker-compose. A production-grade single server deployment would be a real interesting case.
      - ngrilly 6y ago
        The big problem for me with Docker Compose is the lack of zero downtime / seamless deployments. First it stops the containers running the old version, then it starts new containers running new versions, instead of doing the reverse.
  - ngrilly 6y ago
    For single node or small cluster deployments, one issue with k8s is the significant CPU and RAM usage even on a fully idle system with no payload. How is Nomad in that regard? Are the controllers also implemented as a control loop that is constantly polling and diffing reported and desired state?
    - big-malloc 6y ago
      Granted this is anecdotal, but I found Nomad to have much more reasonable resource usage compared to K3s on my pi cluster
cs-szazz 6y ago
First off, very cool. I'm a big Hashicorp fan, and have been following Nomad for a while, so it's exciting you hit 1.0! It seems to me one of the advantages K8s has is that there are multiple "Kubernetes as a Service" services out there, such as EKS on AWS, Google Cloud's offering, even Digital Ocean. Are there any plans to make Nomad Enterprise more accessible? It seems a managed Nomad hits the sweet spot of simple scheduling, which removes a lot of the K8s bloat for many people.
- schmichael 6y ago
  Thanks! I think you really hit the nail on the head. In a twitter thread I talk about how Nomad 1.0 represents us implementing the "table stakes", the base foundation, for an orchestrator. However, I think what you're noticing is how the table stakes have changed from 5 years ago: orchestrators need hosted options. k8s has push-button support from every major cloud. We can't just ignore that. And we aren't ignoring that. I have no idea what I can say publicly, so I'll just link to what our cofounder/CTO has already said: > And hosted Nomad clusters are on the way https://twitter.com/mitchellh/status/1334198278225682434 https://twitter.com/mitchellh/status/1334198278225682434
  - cs-szazz 6y ago
    Thanks! I wish Hashicorp the best of luck getting hosted clusters out the door, totally agree with you about table stakes.
jrnkntl 6y ago
Ah, I've submitted this as soon as I saw the notification of the new release on Github, maybe the blog post was indeed more relevant. Congratulations on this milestone release, we're using Nomad since March this year on a single 'bare-metal' server and it serves our needs perfectly. We set it up with a simple gorilla/mux API in front and use the Nomad API to submit jobs from all our other applications and it works flawlessly. With regards to 1.0's features: HCL2 is a welcome addition for us since we had a lot of repetition in our job files using artifacts for tasks. Also the addition of the PostStop lifecycle couldn't come at a better time, we were discussing workarounds for this recently. One area of potential improvement would be the behaviour of file/directory permissions through different task drivers, I know this is totally dependent of the different drivers we can use with Nomad but more than once we bumped into this while setting up our jobs (and others too [1][2]) [1] https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/2625 https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/2625 [2] https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/8892 https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/8892 Thanks for all the work your team did. I am a big fan of the Hashicorp ecosystem.
- schmichael 6y ago
  > One area of potential improvement would be the behaviour of file/directory permissions through different task drivers, I know this is totally dependent of the different drivers we can use with Nomad but more than once we bumped into this while setting up our jobs (and others too [1][2]) Thanks for mentioning these. Everyone interested should definitely +1 them as we do use reaction emoji during prioritization. The task driver dependent nature does make this tricky, but since the Nomad agent is usually run as root and controls the allocation/task directory tree we should have some options here.

gavinray 6y ago

I'm a big fan conceptually of Nomad, and I love the streams that the Nomad team does to talk about development and answer questions. My only comments would be: I wish there was more content available (maybe on HashiCorp Learn Nomad) for working with single-instance Nomad clusters. And a demo of realworld dev-to-prod workflow. Something like "Okay here's a local Docker Compose setup with Postgres, a backend API, and a frontend web app, and here's the workflow for getting it into production with Nomad."

schmichael 6y ago
Thanks that's great feedback and you're not alone in that desire. We do "small" users a pretty big disservice by effectively dismissing single-server deployments and jumping straight to "real" production deployments (3+ servers distinct from the nodes that run workloads). We have people who use Nomad locally as a systemd alternative. We have people who use single-scheduler-multiple-nodes clusters at home or at work, and it works quite well! If the scheduler crashes, work continues to run uninterrupted, so there's little reason not to start small and scale up. The problem is largely that it's tricky to separate out and accurately address these various personas. People looking for a systemd alternative are obviously highly technical and will likely figure everything out through experimentation. However, "small" cluster users need to be carefully educated on the differences between an HA cluster (3+ schedulers) and a single scheduler cluster. Not only that, but we would need to automate testing for each of these recommendations to ensure changes don't break an official recommendation.
- gavinray 6y ago
  Yeah, I mean also from a financial/business standpoint I totally get it. The incentive is to target content efforts towards enterprise and large-scale orgs. Because who cares if the indie dev or small startup is running your stack, let's be real.
- ngrilly 6y ago
  I’d be happy to know more about the single node use case. I considered Nomad in the past for this, but it seemed optimized for a cluster, and I ended up using Docker Swarm instead.
  - tpetry 6y ago
    Same for me, i did stick to docker-compose. A production-grade single server deployment would be a real interesting case.
    - ngrilly 6y ago
      The big problem for me with Docker Compose is the lack of zero downtime / seamless deployments. First it stops the containers running the old version, then it starts new containers running new versions, instead of doing the reverse.
- ngrilly 6y ago
  For single node or small cluster deployments, one issue with k8s is the significant CPU and RAM usage even on a fully idle system with no payload. How is Nomad in that regard? Are the controllers also implemented as a control loop that is constantly polling and diffing reported and desired state?
  - big-malloc 6y ago
    Granted this is anecdotal, but I found Nomad to have much more reasonable resource usage compared to K3s on my pi cluster

cs-szazz 6y ago

First off, very cool. I'm a big Hashicorp fan, and have been following Nomad for a while, so it's exciting you hit 1.0! It seems to me one of the advantages K8s has is that there are multiple "Kubernetes as a Service" services out there, such as EKS on AWS, Google Cloud's offering, even Digital Ocean. Are there any plans to make Nomad Enterprise more accessible? It seems a managed Nomad hits the sweet spot of simple scheduling, which removes a lot of the K8s bloat for many people.

schmichael 6y ago
Thanks! I think you really hit the nail on the head. In a twitter thread I talk about how Nomad 1.0 represents us implementing the "table stakes", the base foundation, for an orchestrator. However, I think what you're noticing is how the table stakes have changed from 5 years ago: orchestrators need hosted options. k8s has push-button support from every major cloud. We can't just ignore that. And we aren't ignoring that. I have no idea what I can say publicly, so I'll just link to what our cofounder/CTO has already said: > And hosted Nomad clusters are on the way https://twitter.com/mitchellh/status/1334198278225682434 https://twitter.com/mitchellh/status/1334198278225682434
- cs-szazz 6y ago
  Thanks! I wish Hashicorp the best of luck getting hosted clusters out the door, totally agree with you about table stakes.

jrnkntl 6y ago

Ah, I've submitted this as soon as I saw the notification of the new release on Github, maybe the blog post was indeed more relevant. Congratulations on this milestone release, we're using Nomad since March this year on a single 'bare-metal' server and it serves our needs perfectly. We set it up with a simple gorilla/mux API in front and use the Nomad API to submit jobs from all our other applications and it works flawlessly. With regards to 1.0's features: HCL2 is a welcome addition for us since we had a lot of repetition in our job files using artifacts for tasks. Also the addition of the PostStop lifecycle couldn't come at a better time, we were discussing workarounds for this recently. One area of potential improvement would be the behaviour of file/directory permissions through different task drivers, I know this is totally dependent of the different drivers we can use with Nomad but more than once we bumped into this while setting up our jobs (and others too [1][2]) [1] https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/2625 https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/2625 [2] https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/8892 https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/8892 Thanks for all the work your team did. I am a big fan of the Hashicorp ecosystem.

schmichael 6y ago
> One area of potential improvement would be the behaviour of file/directory permissions through different task drivers, I know this is totally dependent of the different drivers we can use with Nomad but more than once we bumped into this while setting up our jobs (and others too [1][2]) Thanks for mentioning these. Everyone interested should definitely +1 them as we do use reaction emoji during prioritization. The task driver dependent nature does make this tricky, but since the Nomad agent is usually run as root and controls the allocation/task directory tree we should have some options here.