4 ms·

IMO Kubernetes is of the level of complexity of a programming language or an OS. It's just at a larger scope, and we don't have a lot of things in that space, s

by geofft 5y ago

IMO Kubernetes is of the level of complexity of a programming language or an OS. It's just at a larger scope, and we don't have a lot of things in that space, so we don't have well-defined concepts like "language" or "OS" to encompass them. There are basically entire industries dedicated to stopping programming languages from doing bad things (static analysis vendors, auditing consultancies, formal verification tool vendors, etc.) and to stopping OSes from doing bad things (application-focused monitoring tools, security-focused intrusion detection tools, policy enforcement / device management vendors, etc.), and we don't really say "Wow, something is wrong with C++" or "Wow, something is wrong with Linux." We understand that they are high-power tools and you do want additional tools to focus that power. (Well, to be fair, I say something is wrong with C++, but my preferred solution to that is even more complicated programming languages :) )

romanlab 5y ago
That may be true but programming languages are there to give you the power to develop any idea into a working software solution. I think K8s differs because I see it as something that simplifies infra and abstracts infra vendor specific concepts. The complexity in K8s doesn't add power, just confusion ;)
- geofft 5y ago
  Kubernetes does simplify and abstract - just like C++ simplifies and abstracts compared to writing assembly. :) In both cases, the scope of what you can do expands significantly, which means that the systems you build with the higher-level tool are significantly more complex, which means that you see much more confusing C++ programs and Kubernetes deployments than assembly programs and five-lovingly-handcrafted-servers deployments.... but that's because you can successfully start with a more complex idea and make it happen.
TeMPOraL 5y ago
Don't we? :). I say[0] something is wrong with programming itself, on a more fundamental level than the evolutionary history of C++. I can't give a coherent and detailed analysis of it yet[1] - but I have this growing feeling that we're drowning in accidental complexity all across the board, at every abstraction layer. Like an inverse iceberg - where we see this whole, humongous mountain of tooling required to build and maintain software systems, but you can't shake the impression that we should be able to do the job with just the bit that's sticking above the waterline. Speaking of k8s being "of the level of complexity of a programming language or an OS", I bet there's some formal way to show some isomorphism here - them being different incarnations of the same abstract structure. It's another kind of feeling I get when jumping up and down the software stack[2]. Maybe one day we'll figure it all out. -- [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28568053 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28568053 [1] - But I am collecting observations and trying to mull the problem over in my subconscious mind. [2] - Like e.g. code is data is code; your config parser is an interpreter of a programming language. Often enough, it grows to look like a typical PL, then gets replaced by one[3]. If your config happens to describe infrastructure, at some point you might realize you're writing "function calls" for business logic that are implemented in terms of spinning clusters up and down. Or e.g. the realization that DCOM is essentially microservices, so for some two decades or more, every Windows installation had something similar to k8s deep inside its bowels. [3] - https://mikehadlow.blogspot.com/2012/05/configuration-complexity-clock.html https://mikehadlow.blogspot.com/2012/05/configuration-comple...

by geofft 5y ago

romanlab 5y ago

That may be true but programming languages are there to give you the power to develop any idea into a working software solution. I think K8s differs because I see it as something that simplifies infra and abstracts infra vendor specific concepts. The complexity in K8s doesn't add power, just confusion ;)

geofft 5y ago
Kubernetes does simplify and abstract - just like C++ simplifies and abstracts compared to writing assembly. :) In both cases, the scope of what you can do expands significantly, which means that the systems you build with the higher-level tool are significantly more complex, which means that you see much more confusing C++ programs and Kubernetes deployments than assembly programs and five-lovingly-handcrafted-servers deployments.... but that's because you can successfully start with a more complex idea and make it happen.

TeMPOraL 5y ago

Don't we? :). I say[0] something is wrong with programming itself, on a more fundamental level than the evolutionary history of C++. I can't give a coherent and detailed analysis of it yet[1] - but I have this growing feeling that we're drowning in accidental complexity all across the board, at every abstraction layer. Like an inverse iceberg - where we see this whole, humongous mountain of tooling required to build and maintain software systems, but you can't shake the impression that we should be able to do the job with just the bit that's sticking above the waterline. Speaking of k8s being "of the level of complexity of a programming language or an OS", I bet there's some formal way to show some isomorphism here - them being different incarnations of the same abstract structure. It's another kind of feeling I get when jumping up and down the software stack[2]. Maybe one day we'll figure it all out. -- [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28568053 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28568053 [1] - But I am collecting observations and trying to mull the problem over in my subconscious mind. [2] - Like e.g. code is data is code; your config parser is an interpreter of a programming language. Often enough, it grows to look like a typical PL, then gets replaced by one[3]. If your config happens to describe infrastructure, at some point you might realize you're writing "function calls" for business logic that are implemented in terms of spinning clusters up and down. Or e.g. the realization that DCOM is essentially microservices, so for some two decades or more, every Windows installation had something similar to k8s deep inside its bowels. [3] - https://mikehadlow.blogspot.com/2012/05/configuration-complexity-clock.html https://mikehadlow.blogspot.com/2012/05/configuration-comple...