14 ms·

Crazy that someone is using something as complex as k8s on a home server and without knowing basics. Newbies are better served starting with the simple stuff a

Crazy that someone is using something as complex as k8s on a home server and without knowing basics. Newbies are better served starting with the simple stuff and then moving to the complex if needed

homodyne 2y ago
[dead]
robertlagrant 2y ago
I think it's good. K8s is well packaged (these days) and quite discoverable. I agree it's likely to throw up some problems, but it's great that it's possible.
- TZubiri 2y ago
  I'll be honest, never learned it, worked up from network protocols, reached docker in terms of virtualization, and of course OS fundamentals. But even in those 3 areas I haven't exhausted all the knowledge and features available. So I'm just skeptical when someone is using k8s and hasn't mastered the fundamentals. How do they know whether they should be using a high level k8 feature or a low level os feature? Happened with docker a lot to me when I didn't know better, I was learning how to set memory limits on containers and reset policies instead of learning to do it on the OS level.
  - Operyl 2y ago
    > reached docker in terms of virtualization Except docker, on its own without something else in the stack, isn't Virtualization.
    - TZubiri 2y ago
      Not arguing this again, go edit the wikipedia article if you are so confident
    - robertlagrant 2y ago
      Docker is kernel virtualisation. Are you thinking of OS virtualisation, like a VM?
      - Timber-6539 2y ago
        Virtualization usually refers to OS/ device emulation in software. Docker uses kernel namespaces which is an entirely unrelated feature.
        TZubiri 2y ago
        I find it funny how some obtuse devs are unable to use abstraction in software of all things.
      - xrisk 2y ago
        Docker does not virtualize the kernel, in fact the kernel version “inside” Docker is the same as the host.
      - anonfordays 2y ago
        Docker is OS-level virtualization. VMs are hardware virtualization. Different layers.
        Spivak 2y ago
        That isn't even true, you share your host kernel. There are parts of the kernel that aren't namespaced as well. The kernel keyring is probably the big one.
        anonfordays 2y ago
        >That isn't even true You are incorrect, this is true: "OS-level virtualization is an operating system (OS) virtualization paradigm in which the kernel allows the existence of multiple isolated user space instances, including containers (LXC, Solaris Containers, AIX WPARs, HP-UX SRP Containers, Docker, Podman)..."[0]. >you share your host kernel Kernel != OS >There are parts of the kernel that aren't namespaced as well. The kernel keyring is probably the big one. Immaterial. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS-level_virtualization https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS-level_virtualization
  - vegarde 2y ago
    OP here. Of course I haven't mastered he fundamentals of K8s yet, I am just beginning to learn it. Like you, I have been using docker for years, and to be honest it served me very well - and would probably continue to do so. But as a geek, I have a natural curiosity, sometimes just the curiosity of whether or not something can be done, and how it works, is enough justifications to do it. As you probably read, this is in my home services. Which is where I am free to do exactly these experiments before I know the inns and outs of it. Some of what I wrote in the blog post, I have already ditched. I am no longer hardcoding the ipv6 addresses from the pools, for example, but I still need to change my pool ip addresses if my ISP changes the range. I am not sure if my way is the correct one. I could do it manually, but what's the fun in that ? There will be more blog posts as I learn, you be sure (there already is). I have more coming up, but one of my current projects will take a bit of time, as I have decided that writing a Unifi Operator for managing firewall rules is a better way to do it :) Now, for home use? Whoever does that, write K8s Operators? If you're on hacker news then you should understand that the goal isn't necessarily the result, it's the learning experience.
npodbielski 2y ago
Probably he is not a newbie entirelly since he was able to run kebernetes. Anyway I agree that there no point in using k8s for home stuff. Single instance of anything should be sufficient for any needs like that. On the other hand maybe someone just like to tinker with technology.
- vegarde 2y ago
  Exactly (OP here). The goal wasn't necessarily the result. I like to tinker. And well...my K8s cluster is only one node so far, so there's limits to what I can play with. And please: No comments that K8s is overkill. I know, and I don't care :) There's things to learn from it, and that's good enough reason for me.
flessner 2y ago
Well, we've all got to start somewhere, right? But yeah, I'd personally recommend Docker for self-hosting. Kubernetes or Proxmox always end up being too much to handle for personal use - or even small to medium sized companies.
- cassianoleal 2y ago
  > Proxmox always end up being too much to handle I've been running a 2-node Proxmox cluster for about 3 years with close to no maintenance. What's too much about it? It gives me easy VM and LXC management and very easy declarative networking and firewalling. That alone makes it worth it for me.
  - JamesSwift 2y ago
    Right, proxmox (like k8s) is a huge force multiplier for individuals trying to manage large/diverse surface areas. I run both for my own stuff at home (well k8s in the cloud, but its not work related) precisely because of the power it offers. Yes they are complicated. Yes, they are still worth learning. And once you learn them they make a lot of sense to use when given the option.
    - gh02t 2y ago
      I think OP is saying Proxmox isn't really that complicated compared to K8. I guess my perspective is warped since I know what I'm doing pretty well, but installing Proxmox and setting up some basic VMs or LXC containers (especially if you use the helper scripts) isn't that hard. Sure, there is still some added complexity, but I think that's more than offset by the ease of doing backups alone. Meanwhile, my experiences with K8s have all been mostly painful and I didn't really feel like I gained anything to offset the complexity versus just using Docker (for my personal use, obviously K8 makes sense at enterprise scale or if you use your homelab for learning).
lawn 2y ago
Running something complex at home to learn is definitely a good idea.

Crazy that someone is using something as complex as k8s on a home server and without knowing basics. Newbies are better served starting with the simple stuff and then moving to the complex if needed

homodyne 2y ago

[dead]

robertlagrant 2y ago

I think it's good. K8s is well packaged (these days) and quite discoverable. I agree it's likely to throw up some problems, but it's great that it's possible.

TZubiri 2y ago
I'll be honest, never learned it, worked up from network protocols, reached docker in terms of virtualization, and of course OS fundamentals. But even in those 3 areas I haven't exhausted all the knowledge and features available. So I'm just skeptical when someone is using k8s and hasn't mastered the fundamentals. How do they know whether they should be using a high level k8 feature or a low level os feature? Happened with docker a lot to me when I didn't know better, I was learning how to set memory limits on containers and reset policies instead of learning to do it on the OS level.
- Operyl 2y ago
  > reached docker in terms of virtualization Except docker, on its own without something else in the stack, isn't Virtualization.
  - TZubiri 2y ago
    Not arguing this again, go edit the wikipedia article if you are so confident
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    Docker is kernel virtualisation. Are you thinking of OS virtualisation, like a VM?
    - Timber-6539 2y ago
      Virtualization usually refers to OS/ device emulation in software. Docker uses kernel namespaces which is an entirely unrelated feature.
      - TZubiri 2y ago
        I find it funny how some obtuse devs are unable to use abstraction in software of all things.
    - xrisk 2y ago
      Docker does not virtualize the kernel, in fact the kernel version “inside” Docker is the same as the host.
    - anonfordays 2y ago
      Docker is OS-level virtualization. VMs are hardware virtualization. Different layers.
      - Spivak 2y ago
        That isn't even true, you share your host kernel. There are parts of the kernel that aren't namespaced as well. The kernel keyring is probably the big one.
        anonfordays 2y ago
        >That isn't even true You are incorrect, this is true: "OS-level virtualization is an operating system (OS) virtualization paradigm in which the kernel allows the existence of multiple isolated user space instances, including containers (LXC, Solaris Containers, AIX WPARs, HP-UX SRP Containers, Docker, Podman)..."[0]. >you share your host kernel Kernel != OS >There are parts of the kernel that aren't namespaced as well. The kernel keyring is probably the big one. Immaterial. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS-level_virtualization https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS-level_virtualization
- vegarde 2y ago
  OP here. Of course I haven't mastered he fundamentals of K8s yet, I am just beginning to learn it. Like you, I have been using docker for years, and to be honest it served me very well - and would probably continue to do so. But as a geek, I have a natural curiosity, sometimes just the curiosity of whether or not something can be done, and how it works, is enough justifications to do it. As you probably read, this is in my home services. Which is where I am free to do exactly these experiments before I know the inns and outs of it. Some of what I wrote in the blog post, I have already ditched. I am no longer hardcoding the ipv6 addresses from the pools, for example, but I still need to change my pool ip addresses if my ISP changes the range. I am not sure if my way is the correct one. I could do it manually, but what's the fun in that ? There will be more blog posts as I learn, you be sure (there already is). I have more coming up, but one of my current projects will take a bit of time, as I have decided that writing a Unifi Operator for managing firewall rules is a better way to do it :) Now, for home use? Whoever does that, write K8s Operators? If you're on hacker news then you should understand that the goal isn't necessarily the result, it's the learning experience.

npodbielski 2y ago

Probably he is not a newbie entirelly since he was able to run kebernetes. Anyway I agree that there no point in using k8s for home stuff. Single instance of anything should be sufficient for any needs like that. On the other hand maybe someone just like to tinker with technology.

vegarde 2y ago
Exactly (OP here). The goal wasn't necessarily the result. I like to tinker. And well...my K8s cluster is only one node so far, so there's limits to what I can play with. And please: No comments that K8s is overkill. I know, and I don't care :) There's things to learn from it, and that's good enough reason for me.

flessner 2y ago

Well, we've all got to start somewhere, right? But yeah, I'd personally recommend Docker for self-hosting. Kubernetes or Proxmox always end up being too much to handle for personal use - or even small to medium sized companies.

cassianoleal 2y ago
> Proxmox always end up being too much to handle I've been running a 2-node Proxmox cluster for about 3 years with close to no maintenance. What's too much about it? It gives me easy VM and LXC management and very easy declarative networking and firewalling. That alone makes it worth it for me.
- JamesSwift 2y ago
  Right, proxmox (like k8s) is a huge force multiplier for individuals trying to manage large/diverse surface areas. I run both for my own stuff at home (well k8s in the cloud, but its not work related) precisely because of the power it offers. Yes they are complicated. Yes, they are still worth learning. And once you learn them they make a lot of sense to use when given the option.
  - gh02t 2y ago
    I think OP is saying Proxmox isn't really that complicated compared to K8. I guess my perspective is warped since I know what I'm doing pretty well, but installing Proxmox and setting up some basic VMs or LXC containers (especially if you use the helper scripts) isn't that hard. Sure, there is still some added complexity, but I think that's more than offset by the ease of doing backups alone. Meanwhile, my experiences with K8s have all been mostly painful and I didn't really feel like I gained anything to offset the complexity versus just using Docker (for my personal use, obviously K8 makes sense at enterprise scale or if you use your homelab for learning).

lawn 2y ago

Running something complex at home to learn is definitely a good idea.