3 ms·
That might be true, but unfortunately the state of the art infrastructure tooling is mostly centered around k8s. This means that companies choose k8s (or relate
by imiric 3y ago
That might be true, but unfortunately the state of the art infrastructure tooling is mostly centered around k8s. This means that companies choose k8s (or related technologies like k3s, Microk8s, etc.) not because they strictly _need_ k8s, but because it improves their workflows. Otherwise they would need to invest a disproportionate amount of time and effort adopting and maintaining alternative tooling, while getting an inferior experience.
Choosing k8s is not just based on scaling requirements anymore. There are also benefits of being compatible with a rich ecosystem of software.
- PUSH_AX 3y agoCan you specify what state of the art infra tooling you mean?
- imiric 3y agoContinuous deployment systems like ArgoCD and Flux, user friendly local development environments with tools like Tilt, novel networking, distributed storage, distributed tracing, etc. systems that are basically plug-and-play, etc. Search for "awesome k8s" and you'll get many lists of these. It's surely possible to cobble all of this together without k8s, but k8s' main advantage is exposing a standardized API that simplifies managing this entire ecosystem. It often makes it worth the additional overhead of adopting, understanding and managing k8s itself.