3 ms·

until you get "hardware failure" note from cloud provider. Or the person updating packages makes a typo and messes up a system. sure, use "pet" computers for e

• pclmulqdq 3y ago
  Having a few computers doesn't imply a "pets" approach to managing them.
  • catchnear4321 3y ago
    more like a zoo, right?
• singron 3y ago
  I think everyone internalizes pets vs cattle a little differently, but I think people often don't realize that if you have cattle, then you now have a cattle ranch. I.e. you often create a new concept to manage your cattle, and you often run that like it's a pet. E.g. you want to think about your machines/containers like cattle, so you put them into a kubernetes cluster, which has become your new pet. If all your infra fits on one machine, it's way easier to have that as your pet the same way it's easier to have a dog than run a livestock operation.
  • antonvs 3y ago
    In cloud environments, it's pretty standard practice to automate cluster provisioning. If your cluster are pets, you're not doing it quite right. > If all your infra fits on one machine, it's way easier to have that as your pet What stops you from automating the provisioning of that? These are two orthogonal issues. Clusters are used to manage many machines. If you need only one machine, you don't need a cluster. Either way, the provisioning of single nodes and clusters should be automated. Whether you have pets or cattle is not related to how many machines you have.