5 ms·

Let's talk about storage & load-balancing in the context of k8s. You are only truly cloud agnostic if you are not using your cloud provider's load balancer or s

Let's talk about storage & load-balancing in the context of k8s. You are only truly cloud agnostic if you are not using your cloud provider's load balancer or storage replication tools. Run k8s on bare metal with metallb, and something like ranchers longhorn. Then, when you've got that working, move it into the cloud. Run it all on VMs and not cloud-managed k8s. Then you probably still aren't quite there, because IAM and S3 and so on. In short being cloud agnostic is dumb. Just know that you will have some vendor lock-in. Pick how much you can tolerate, and live with the rest. IMHO, it's a stupid constraint. Just pick a provider and go all in. If not, get the definition from management and skate as close to it as you can.

taylodl 5y ago
I don't disagree with you. My counter-argument has been cloud is a platform. There's an interpretation of the phrase "cloud agnostic" that essentially means you're agnostic to the OS, middleware, and application servers. We've never been so agnostic before, what makes us think we can be now? That's why I'm thinking "cloud agnostic" has to mean something different. I don't see there being a problem with needing to re-work an application a little bit in order to deploy it to another cloud platform. The question is what kind of work would a reasonable person expect "re-work" to entail?
speedgoose 5y ago
It depends on your company. For a startup or a small company doing basic things, where the IT is not where the innovation is, I would pick a cloud provider and go all in. Otherwise I would rather be cloud agnostic when it makes sense. Because the cloud provider you pick will have many bad / low quality / expensive products that you will be forced to use because using another cloud provider is too much efforts. Being cloud agnostic allows you to use the best on the market.
- bradwood 5y ago
  There is a difference between being agnostic and multi-cloud. Setting up a wireguard tunnel or direct connect between GCP and AWS is not hard and that gives you the best of both...
  - speedgoose 5y ago
    Alright. I assumed it meant the same.

taylodl 5y ago

I don't disagree with you. My counter-argument has been cloud is a platform. There's an interpretation of the phrase "cloud agnostic" that essentially means you're agnostic to the OS, middleware, and application servers. We've never been so agnostic before, what makes us think we can be now? That's why I'm thinking "cloud agnostic" has to mean something different. I don't see there being a problem with needing to re-work an application a little bit in order to deploy it to another cloud platform. The question is what kind of work would a reasonable person expect "re-work" to entail?

speedgoose 5y ago

It depends on your company. For a startup or a small company doing basic things, where the IT is not where the innovation is, I would pick a cloud provider and go all in. Otherwise I would rather be cloud agnostic when it makes sense. Because the cloud provider you pick will have many bad / low quality / expensive products that you will be forced to use because using another cloud provider is too much efforts. Being cloud agnostic allows you to use the best on the market.

bradwood 5y ago
There is a difference between being agnostic and multi-cloud. Setting up a wireguard tunnel or direct connect between GCP and AWS is not hard and that gives you the best of both...
- speedgoose 5y ago
  Alright. I assumed it meant the same.