3 ms·
Yeah I mean if you are aiming to optimize for running on single node clusters then something that is first and foremost an efficient bin-packer isn't a great fi
by JamesSwift 4y ago
Yeah I mean if you are aiming to optimize for running on single node clusters then something that is first and foremost an efficient bin-packer isn't a great fit. I'm also assuming the alternative is running on the cloud rather than a colo/dedicated server.
EDIT: to be clear K8s is not good for "POC" phase of development. Its definitely good for "ok this is a worthwhile product and we are now officially building this out for production".
- MuffinFlavored 4y agoI guess a better question is, how far can a single node get you performance wise (I guess you have to ignore disaster recovery/automatic rollover based on regions) without needing k8s? Like, "really far"? What's a good rule of thumb on when you should introduce k8s?
- JamesSwift 4y agoIts highly variable based on the specific workloads. Its going to be bottle-neck based. Thats different for everyone. And again, for moving from dedicated to non-dedicated its more of a cloud vs raw metal consideration. K8s is a "better" way to do cloud for most of the use-cases we are debating in this comment section.
- MuffinFlavored 4y ago> raw metal consideration devil's advocate but couldn't you technically (if you were trying to keep an entire software business's cost under say... $500/mo) run k8s (or k3s or whatever) in a production setting on a single node "raw metal"? i know that's frowned upon but, i feel like performance/dollar comparsion, moving it to the cloud + k8s gets wildly more expensive quickly?