4 ms·

I’m confused. Isn’t a kubernetes cluster just a way to deploy software onto a couple of dozen ec2 instances? Sure it has some accidental complexity, but so doe

I’m confused. Isn’t a kubernetes cluster just a way to deploy software onto a couple of dozen ec2 instances? Sure it has some accidental complexity, but so does having half a dozen different software systems each managing their own deployment pathway onto ec2. There seems to be some belief that kubernetes has to be some kind of crazy complex system to operate, when really it’s just an api for managing which docker processes get spun up.

BlargMcLarg 6y ago
Most tools are easier than people make them out to be. The average dev just isn't that great, and the average company overestimates the difficulty of these tools, while burying their devs with mindless drone work so they never get the time to study these things. The average dev isn't one which has studied CS/software dev and/or spends loads of free time still investigating tech off the clock, either.
throwdbaaway 6y ago
> when really it’s just an api for managing which docker processes get spun up On GCP, the goal can be achieved without kubernetes, by deploying containers on VMs and MIGs: https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/containers/deploying-containers https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/containers/deploying-c... Comparing that to kubernetes, the latter is indeed some kind of crazy complex system to operate. The same can also be done either on GCP with non-COS images or on AWS, with a little bit of automation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26274033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26274033
- jameshart 6y ago
  Right. I said k8s is a way. Not the way. There might be others. They might have their own trade offs.
- thisiszilff 6y ago
  > Comparing that to kubernetes, the latter is indeed some kind of crazy complex system to operate. I think the fair comparison here would be that to google's kubernetes engine. Getting a kubernetes cluster up and running in GCP is really easy.
0xbadcafebee 6y ago
> Isn’t a kubernetes cluster just a way to deploy software onto a couple of dozen ec2 instances? Sure. And a nuclear power plant is just a way to generate electricity.
- arcticfox 6y ago
  I am always baffled by this take. I run k8s because it's by far the easiest way to do what I want (deploy a handful of services to a handful of servers), not because it's cool or massively powerful. In the past few years, k8s simply got easy to get started with and it feels like no one noticed.
  - 0xbadcafebee 6y ago
    If it was easy to set up a nuclear power plant, would that be a great idea for anyone to set one up and run it? You will run into problems eventually that you won't be able to solve (especially as you have more complex requirements). If this is just for a pet project you probably won't care. But if there's a lot riding on you being able to fix it quickly, you will not enjoy being in a position where fixing it takes hours to days. It's like a car. Super easy to operate, until there's a strange sound, and then something falls off. Do you know how to fix it? Do you need to get to work in 30 minutes? Can you just "order an Uber" when it comes to K8s?
    - jameshart 6y ago
      I’m not sure what justifies the analogy of kubernetes to either a nuclear power plant or a car you mysteriously have no ability to fix, nor why the existence of an ‘Uber for kubernetes’ seems so outlandish (I mean there are literally api calls I can make to cloud platforms that will summon new kubernetes infrastructure for me to rent, in minutes, which is pretty Uber-like). It’s not rocket science, it’s just networking, config management and container orchestration. All these analogies are equally true of just.. running Linux in the first place. Or writing software. Using things that require some knowledge requires some knowledge.
auganov 6y ago
I'd assume anybody criticizing kubernetes isn't a huge docker fan either. I see both used much more as dev ops tools rather than real cluster management. Particularly questionable in organizations that may not have any in-house tech expertise. Some contractor, who may be the only programmer involved at a given time, comes in and sets everything up the kubernetes/docker way. From now on you'll always need kubernetes-enabled devs to maintain your thing. Happened to somebody I know. They believed they had a "cluster" with different "servers" but it was a single machine. Then I had to explain why they cannot just FTP into the server, upload plugin folders (like some tutorial asked) and expect it to work. Nor did I have enough time to help out since who knows how these dockers mount folders, what's the latest "best practice" or what the dev who maintains it prefers. There's no way they'll ever need more than one machine. I'm pretty sure the system in question does not even have a good cluster story in the first place, so at best you could scale the database (which usually can do clusters well without 3rd party tools).

BlargMcLarg 6y ago

Most tools are easier than people make them out to be. The average dev just isn't that great, and the average company overestimates the difficulty of these tools, while burying their devs with mindless drone work so they never get the time to study these things. The average dev isn't one which has studied CS/software dev and/or spends loads of free time still investigating tech off the clock, either.

throwdbaaway 6y ago

> when really it’s just an api for managing which docker processes get spun up On GCP, the goal can be achieved without kubernetes, by deploying containers on VMs and MIGs: https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/containers/deploying-containers https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/containers/deploying-c... Comparing that to kubernetes, the latter is indeed some kind of crazy complex system to operate. The same can also be done either on GCP with non-COS images or on AWS, with a little bit of automation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26274033 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26274033

jameshart 6y ago
Right. I said k8s is a way. Not the way. There might be others. They might have their own trade offs.
thisiszilff 6y ago
> Comparing that to kubernetes, the latter is indeed some kind of crazy complex system to operate. I think the fair comparison here would be that to google's kubernetes engine. Getting a kubernetes cluster up and running in GCP is really easy.

0xbadcafebee 6y ago

> Isn’t a kubernetes cluster just a way to deploy software onto a couple of dozen ec2 instances? Sure. And a nuclear power plant is just a way to generate electricity.

arcticfox 6y ago
I am always baffled by this take. I run k8s because it's by far the easiest way to do what I want (deploy a handful of services to a handful of servers), not because it's cool or massively powerful. In the past few years, k8s simply got easy to get started with and it feels like no one noticed.
- 0xbadcafebee 6y ago
  If it was easy to set up a nuclear power plant, would that be a great idea for anyone to set one up and run it? You will run into problems eventually that you won't be able to solve (especially as you have more complex requirements). If this is just for a pet project you probably won't care. But if there's a lot riding on you being able to fix it quickly, you will not enjoy being in a position where fixing it takes hours to days. It's like a car. Super easy to operate, until there's a strange sound, and then something falls off. Do you know how to fix it? Do you need to get to work in 30 minutes? Can you just "order an Uber" when it comes to K8s?
  - jameshart 6y ago
    I’m not sure what justifies the analogy of kubernetes to either a nuclear power plant or a car you mysteriously have no ability to fix, nor why the existence of an ‘Uber for kubernetes’ seems so outlandish (I mean there are literally api calls I can make to cloud platforms that will summon new kubernetes infrastructure for me to rent, in minutes, which is pretty Uber-like). It’s not rocket science, it’s just networking, config management and container orchestration. All these analogies are equally true of just.. running Linux in the first place. Or writing software. Using things that require some knowledge requires some knowledge.

auganov 6y ago

I'd assume anybody criticizing kubernetes isn't a huge docker fan either. I see both used much more as dev ops tools rather than real cluster management. Particularly questionable in organizations that may not have any in-house tech expertise. Some contractor, who may be the only programmer involved at a given time, comes in and sets everything up the kubernetes/docker way. From now on you'll always need kubernetes-enabled devs to maintain your thing. Happened to somebody I know. They believed they had a "cluster" with different "servers" but it was a single machine. Then I had to explain why they cannot just FTP into the server, upload plugin folders (like some tutorial asked) and expect it to work. Nor did I have enough time to help out since who knows how these dockers mount folders, what's the latest "best practice" or what the dev who maintains it prefers. There's no way they'll ever need more than one machine. I'm pretty sure the system in question does not even have a good cluster story in the first place, so at best you could scale the database (which usually can do clusters well without 3rd party tools).