3 ms·

The short answer is: Because of Kubernetes. The longer answer is: When you switch to Kubernetes, you are introducing _a lot_ of complexity, which, depending on

The short answer is: Because of Kubernetes. The longer answer is: When you switch to Kubernetes, you are introducing _a lot_ of complexity, which, depending on your actual project, might not be inherent complexity. Yes, you get a shiny tool, but you also get a lot of more things to think about and to manage, to run that cluster, which in turn will require, that you get more devops on board. Sure, there might be projects out there, where Kubernetes is the right solution, but before you switch to it, have a real long hard thinking about that and definitely explore simpler alternatives. It is not like Kubernetes is the only game in town. It is also not like Google invents any wheels with Kubernetes. Not everyone is Google or Facebook or whatever. We need to stop adopting solutions just because they get hyped and used at big company. We need to look more at our real needs and avoid introducing unnecessary complexity.

cestith 4y ago
This is all true enough. The benefit of k8s is that if you need all that complexity, or even most of it, then k8s gives it to you in a fairly standard way. Then everything you build on top of it has a well-documented platform you can hire people to help maintain rather than having to train people for six months on a home-grown solution before they're productive.
trollied 4y ago
I agree 100%. Keep things simpler, invest the $ that would have been spent on k8s staff on performance tuning courses & upskill your devs in squeezing every last millisecond out of a couple of dedicated servers. You can do lots with a couple of beefy machines if the software is tuned. Everything has become so abstracted away these days that performance isn’t even a consideration because people don’t understand the full stack. And I don’t mean “full stack” as it’s slung around these days. EG: doing 20 round trips to the database looking up individual records (as each is an object code-side), when you could just do one. Things like that are opaque & many devs wouldn’t even care or know, but a little bit of education can make a huge difference.

cestith 4y ago

This is all true enough. The benefit of k8s is that if you need all that complexity, or even most of it, then k8s gives it to you in a fairly standard way. Then everything you build on top of it has a well-documented platform you can hire people to help maintain rather than having to train people for six months on a home-grown solution before they're productive.

trollied 4y ago

I agree 100%. Keep things simpler, invest the $ that would have been spent on k8s staff on performance tuning courses & upskill your devs in squeezing every last millisecond out of a couple of dedicated servers. You can do lots with a couple of beefy machines if the software is tuned. Everything has become so abstracted away these days that performance isn’t even a consideration because people don’t understand the full stack. And I don’t mean “full stack” as it’s slung around these days. EG: doing 20 round trips to the database looking up individual records (as each is an object code-side), when you could just do one. Things like that are opaque & many devs wouldn’t even care or know, but a little bit of education can make a huge difference.