eyberg

32 ms·

331.
by eyberg 7y ago
Yeh. Unik is more of a unikernel orchestrator, like OPS is, versus the actual kernel itself. For the go implementation it uses gorump which we sponsored and then retired years ago in favor of Nanos our new kernel. The naming "collision
332.
by eyberg 7y ago
Also Nanos - https://github.com/nanovms/nanos for those who want to run go unikernels on gcloud || aws. (I'm involved in the project).
333.
Running Linux Applications as Unikernels with K8s(hackernoon.com)
5 points by eyberg 7y ago|0 comments
334.
Deploying JavaScript Unikernels to Vultr with Ops(vultr.com)
1 points by eyberg 7y ago|0 comments
335.
by eyberg 7y ago
I think there are few thoughts here. a) I don't necessarily agree with that statement - witness HashiCorp's recent raise: https://www.sdxcentral.com/articles/news/hashicorp-scores- 175m-funding-round-5b-
336.
by eyberg 7y ago
* I don't see the conflation of k8s/containers. Many/most? production container users are using kubernetes. Not sure how that is debatable. Mesosphere changed their name to D2IQ and Docker sold off their enterprise arm. * As
337.
by eyberg 7y ago
I think this thought is extremely on point. A lot of older unix abstractions have been heavily broken when we all started running tens, hundreds, or thousands of vms on the public cloud. Users are relegated to IAM. Most databases can't
338.
by eyberg 7y ago
I'd agree with all the points you just made. I'd also offer that if one is using public cloud than a lot of the orchestration is already taken care of for you.
339.
by eyberg 7y ago
Guilty as charged, although, I would love to see what percentage of HN traffic is someone selling their product. My guess is that it's well over 50%.
340.
by eyberg 7y ago
Would love to see the world evolve past POSIX. Unfortunately, that's where we drew the line on "startup innovation tokens" - maybe round 2. :)
341.
by eyberg 7y ago
The issue here with containers in general is that they break well known security boundaries. This is exacerbated by things like k8s cause it is inherently built to orchestrate many of them and assumes that there is a multi-tenant deployment
342.
by eyberg 7y ago
Agreed. I think for our general use case we are looking at people with needs that are using vms or containers today (eg: not necessarily those that want plaid speed boot-times). That's not really something we are currently optimizing f
343.
by eyberg 7y ago
For everyone asking about a "microvm orchestrator" - the implication here is that the public cloud (where the vast majority of people reading this will be deploying too) is the orchestrator. Public cloud like AWS and GCP does al
344.
by eyberg 7y ago
Oh - I'm not saying that Lambda is what I'd personally choose, although there definitely seems to be quite a few people that do like it. As mentioned in the article - the base unit of compute on public cloud is the virtual machine
345.
by eyberg 7y ago
Free and open source. ;)
346.
by eyberg 7y ago
Not sure why you are getting downvoted here - these all are extremely valid points on why we feel change is necessary. Things have changed dramatically since the 1970s (Unix) and even since 1991 (Linux) yet we are still using the same const
347.
by eyberg 7y ago
For orchestration: Someone else mentioned this in a different comment, but there was very much a link to firecracker in the article. That - and all the other many tools that you would deploy vms to the public cloud today of which there are
348.
by eyberg 7y ago
I use OPS https://ops.city which uses the nanos unikernel https://github.com/nanovms/nanos and since I work on it would appreciate any suggestions/comments/etc. on how to make it better.
349.
Hacking Unikernels Through Process Injection(hackernoon.com)
1 points by eyberg 7y ago|0 comments
350.
Show HN: Build, Run, Deploy Nanos Unikernels(ops.city)
1 points by eyberg 7y ago|0 comments
351.
by eyberg 7y ago
fork has to go - it's unsafe, slow and worst of all - there is a ton of software that uses it - it's not an easy fix because of this but there are a few of us looking at ways of slowly getting rid of it
352.
Running Linux Programs as Unikernels on macOS(dev.to)
5 points by eyberg 7y ago|0 comments
353.
Profiling and Tracing the Nanos Unikernel(nanovms.com)
2 points by eyberg 7y ago|0 comments
354.
by eyberg 7y ago
I'm involved with OPS/Nanos which deploy applications as unikernels to AWS && Google Cloud. The deploy and management of them have a very serverless like feel as you can't ssh into them nor can you install random crap
355.
by eyberg 7y ago
SEEKING WORK | SF Bay Area | Remote OK We're a small shop located in SOMA, SF so if you're local we can visit. We are currently letting a limited number of clients engage with us for consulting purposes. Whether that is greenfield
356.
by eyberg 7y ago
Have you looked at https://github.com/nanovms/nanos yet? What you are describing is fairly close and this is under active development.
357.
by eyberg 7y ago
you're absolutely correct - in cases like that they become nops, however, if you don't have at least stubs you can't load unmodified software which imo is a imperative for any type of mass adoption Drew DeVault had a recent b
358.
by eyberg 7y ago
NanoVMs is the company while Nanos is the kernel. I respect the developers at ScyllaDB (formerly Cloudius Systems) who created OSv quite a lot and find them very talented. There are some fairly major technical differences on implementation
359.
by eyberg 7y ago
I didn't write Google Cloud but if you had your own server 5ms and even lower have been reported by OSv && NEC. http://cnp.neclab.eu/projects/lightvm/lightvm.pdf Nano/Pico is obviously unrealisti
360.
by eyberg 7y ago
I'm not advocating every application should do this as evidenced that this is a toggable switch that's off by default and even by itself doesn't actually have this particular feature (I was forcibly stopping the app through t

More ›