41–50 of 118 posts
the article mentions other big players pulling out or cutting jobs/funding related to OpenStack in recent months in addition to this latest move by Intel. Is this related to some endemic problem with the technology, big egos within the project, dominance by another outside player or what? Cursory searching doesn't reveal any "big thing". Maybe it's just dying a death by a thousand cuts.
Is there an alternative out there for OpenStack? Perhaps a minimalist version?
It's more a competitor to VMware clusters though, or was last time I played with it (a few years ago).
It has a decent rep.
the article mentions other big players pulling out or cutting jobs/funding related to OpenStack in recent months in addition to this latest move by Intel. Is this related to some endemic problem with the technology, big egos within the project, dominance by another outside player or what? Cursory searching doesn't reveal any "big thing". Maybe it's just dying a death by a thousand cuts.
>Is this related to some endemic problem with the technology, I believe the decline of OpenStack is inherent in the type of technology. I don't believe that type of "infrastructure plumbing" software lends itself to high-speed high-quality innovation in the "open source" model. Some reasons: 1) it's boring infrastructure software: Because it is software for "data center" infrastructure, it's not glamorous and interes…
Sites with autoplay videos should be banned.
I've recently started using this Chrome Plugin to disable autoplay: https://github.com/Eloston/disable-html5-autoplay . So far works about 95% of the time, but it recently became unmaintained. It also does not distinguish between when you click on a video and the next link plays it, e.g. Following a link to a YouTube Video or Netflix show.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So are we. And so is another department in our org. Frankly, we're doing a piss poor job of it. Migrations don't happen even if manually ran, the compute nodes are already at capacity, even with the meagre VMs we use. I have kept pushing for Mesos myself. I see it as a good way forward. Openstack may be a technical good body of code... But in the end its too convoluted codebase and many moving parts to be effective i…
Mesos isn't really a direct replacement for Openstack, but you're probably still right to be pushing for it. If you roll with Mesos you will still need to solve a bunch of lower-level infrastructure challenges: machine provisioning, basic system config management, storage management (if you want persistent volumes), fancy networking (if you want ip-per-container or any sort of network isolation), and so on. Like Open…
But looking at it, there are also less moving parts with Mesos compared to OpenStack. As a test, I set up a Mesos Cluster in 3 VM's. It wasn't terribly hard at all.
But at work, we had an alarm thrown in nagios about critical ram consumption on a node. So I go and do the migrate. It works.... And it doesn't. It migrated the VM to the same node. I had to do 2 extra flags to tell OpenStack to migrate the node properly. That's just ridiculous, and dumb.
And not to mention, but Mesos supports proper handling of VMs and migration. It frustrates me to no end the amount of hand-holding I have to do with anything OpenStack based. Whereas Mesos was "Install, configure, run".. With a large amount of work on Configure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm at one of the only companies I know of outside Rackspace that's running it in production. We're doing a very poor job of it; we never hit production with any effort to upgrade the cluster in the past three years, so we're still running Havana with Nova Network. The most likely upgrade path for us right now is VMWare 6.5.
Do you work at eBay, because they run kubernetes ontop of openstack, which sounds a bit awful if you really think about it all.
And then you get to restart everything. Yay.
Whereas if Kubernetes is on something else (OpenStack/Mesos) you at least have control to restart Kubernetes when it shits its brick.
the article mentions other big players pulling out or cutting jobs/funding related to OpenStack in recent months in addition to this latest move by Intel. Is this related to some endemic problem with the technology, big egos within the project, dominance by another outside player or what? Cursory searching doesn't reveal any "big thing". Maybe it's just dying a death by a thousand cuts.
IMO, OpenStack was sort of a consortium effort to compete with VMWare, AWS and Salesforce, but it's operational model is closest to AWS. Nearly all the big enterprise IT companies tied their rafts together hoping to stave the flow of customers. It doesn't appear to have worked.
RackSpace is advertising AWS migration and consulting services on podcasts I listen to. Not exactly a stellar testament for their own cloud product, but I think they still participate.
HP's strategy is a bit haphazard given the recent corporate splitup. On the plus side, the HP/HPE split seems to have allowed HPE to ditch all the weird www# URLs. They retired their public cloud, but still sell hardware that can run OpenStack at least.
Dell bought EMC, and proceeded to shut down their OpenStack offerings in favor of VMWare, which they own a substantial fraction of.
IBM is in a continual process of downsizing its hardware divisions in pursuit of higher earnings per share. It seems their big push is cloudfoundry, which seems to be more about containers and k8s.
So why are they bailing? I'm guessing:
- it's way harder to hire support staff for OpenStack, than VMWare - AWS reduces capital costs and upfront investments - Customers on existing solutions aren't prepared to take advantage of new opportunities - Many of these companies have existing product lines they don't wish to disrupt
I never saw a compan benefitting from openstack.
I'm at one of the only companies I know of outside Rackspace that's running it in production. We're doing a very poor job of it; we never hit production with any effort to upgrade the cluster in the past three years, so we're still running Havana with Nova Network. The most likely upgrade path for us right now is VMWare 6.5.
I always wonder if one of Openstack's weaknesses was also the same thing that was it's strength, it's openness and need to support everything, as well as remaining agnostic to users. Nearly every company I know needs to register VMs on a local DB of some sort, and has patches on Openstack to do that. But every time I went on IRC and asked if we should think about a nicer way of providing this hook, I'd either be redirected to a different project, or get some rude replies.
I also wish there were some more modern companies behind the project; a lot of the developers were probably under pressure from penny pinchers in the management.
That said, it was a terrific project to start my career on.
From someone not very invested in the OpenStack process it feels like all the momentum of the recent push of the project just withered away all at once. I am not sure if the container crowd ate it's lunch, where containerized appliances just solve the problem of openstack better.
OpenStack is a platform for creating an Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS). So it's running on some physical machines, and manages your physical machines to slice into VMs. There you get to manage / create networks, storage, etc. Basically running a private cloud in your own datacenter/basement/office. Openstack has grown more than just compute. It has a supposedly compatible interface for S3 an object storage system…
It's frustrating to read people comparing container technologies or worse container schedulers with OpenStack. Apples and oranges.
If you are planning on running containers on premise you need something from managing the IAAS side of things. OpenStack is excellent at IAAS and is the foundation for running higher level abstractions and services on top.
the article mentions other big players pulling out or cutting jobs/funding related to OpenStack in recent months in addition to this latest move by Intel. Is this related to some endemic problem with the technology, big egos within the project, dominance by another outside player or what? Cursory searching doesn't reveal any "big thing". Maybe it's just dying a death by a thousand cuts.
I don't know about today, but a few years ago I tried to set it up and found it to be an uninstallable massive ball of twine and chewing gum. It was shockingly clunky. I can't imagine running something like that in production. I suppose it'd be good job security for a lot of sysadmins.