Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
161–170 of 208 posts
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. That's why Google has SRE and Facebook has Production Engineering, and so on.
aka "ops" The idea that this will kill "devops" is ludicrious, because devops doesn't actually replace job titles. We have a "Devops engineer". He's an ops engineer, with "dev" in front of his title because he codes in perl and python (...like an op). Visual Studio is a "DevOps Environment". I don't know what this means. It likely means that it can provide end-to-end integration in your development environment, which…
There are, however, a number of people in the field that are all ops and have no development abilities. There is less and less of a need for those kinds of people.
This has been hashed about at length, but the inverse is also true. Developers must learn to operate their software in production.
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Easy peasy. Now try troubleshooting it.
On the cloud providers it is fully managed so nothing really to troubleshoot from the core platform perspective. The applications e.g. ingress will likely do but that's the same as if you were running on bare metal without Kubernetes. And again the monitoring and auditing on Kubernetes is significantly better than trying to roll your own. There is detailed logs and metrics up and down the stack.
Clearly, you haven't run much at scale or experienced many problems.
Troubleshoot a network issue through an ingress, kube-proxy and then down to the pod.
Troubleshoot an issue with kube-api or etcd when you have no access to either the master or the etcd cluster.
Troubleshoot a load issue on a node related to IO.
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#164It is hard not to build this impression of containers. Worse, it seems that the docker image format is massive compared to what most war files were like. This is annoying not just in terms of raw bytes to move around, but in taking stock of what is getting moved around. My team originally pitched how docker solved much of the dependency upgrade management by having layers for each major set of dependencies. That igno…
They are the shit tech that will be abandoned with the next fad. They are a huge boondoggle, solely for the immature leads who have not been coding for decades and know better. This industry is filled with stupid fucks that don't know tech history.
Being in Ops, and having first been paid to do sysadmin work 30 years ago, and having been raised by semiconductor industry veterans, it's pretty safe to say I know tech history.
Having experienced plenty of that history first-hand, including learning to "know better" the hard way, has resulted in a certain amount of conservatism and skepticism toward any new technology, especially one that gains popularity with particular speed.
However, "skepticism" isn't a synonym for "summary dismissal", but, rather, actual skepticism in the sense of asking uncomfortable questions and paying attention to the answers, even they end up being uncomfortable to hear. That's how we grow and, ultimately, know even better.
I've also learned that I enjoy working in smaller companies and/or startup environments far more than the alternative and this has, inevitably, required adapting to some amount of the "move fast and break things" method. Even if its genesis is with leads that can legitimately be labeled as "immature", it merely increases risk, and risk is inherent in startups anyway.
As it applies to my evaluation of new tech, it usually means I get to evaluate it already in operation, instead of merely asking questions. Often, that empirical data is far more valuable, even in forming an argument to stop using that tech.
All that said, so far, I can't help but agree with your assessment of "boondoggle" when all the layers of abstraction, complexity, and cost are included in, languages, ci/cd, virtualization/containers, orchestration, and cloud.
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#165The software world keeps on going in circles :). Next up - lightweight k8s server - stripped down of all the crap that can easily run and deploy a single container.
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I mean by DR is that if a data center gets nuked, you still have a replica of your k8's platform running in your other data center(s). So k8's basically runs a replica of your whole system behind the scenes so if a physical location goes down you still have your system running.
What about all the data in DBMS, file systems, object stores? Also what about BGP routes, firewall settings, SNAT/DNAT rules and the like? There's a lot more to replicate than just the bits in the apps.
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are the shit tech that will be abandoned with the next fad. They are a huge boondoggle, solely for the immature leads who have not been coding for decades and know better. This industry is filled with stupid fucks that don't know tech history.
It's not that. The tech is not a solution for everyone's problems to begin with. It's a purely commercial tech made in an attempt to compete with Amazon and sell you stuff. It's very lock-iny, expensive to leave and is crippled on purpose, to make you buy services from Google. Barrier of entry for competition is high too, so it will be pricey.
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
aka "ops" The idea that this will kill "devops" is ludicrious, because devops doesn't actually replace job titles. We have a "Devops engineer". He's an ops engineer, with "dev" in front of his title because he codes in perl and python (...like an op). Visual Studio is a "DevOps Environment". I don't know what this means. It likely means that it can provide end-to-end integration in your development environment, which…
No disagreement here. There are, however, a number of people in the field that are all ops and have no development abilities. There is less and less of a need for those kinds of people. This has been hashed about at length, but the inverse is also true. Developers must learn to operate their software in production.
I very strongly disagree, unless what you mean by "no development abilities" is merely an inability (or refusal) to write or modify (maybe debug) code. There is here, what I believe, a very important distinction, that is routinely lost, and has all but totally devalued Ops skills in the minds of many tech hiring managers who have exclusively programming backgrounds.
I was on a phone interview today, in fact, lamenting, along with my interviewer, that there exist such sysadmins who don't even write scripts or automation. He suggested that they've started to call themselves "IT", and, IMO, that may well be a more apt term even than "Ops". My own experience is that, back in the dark ages, a traditional sysadmin not only had to be proficient at scripting but also at some amount of C just to port open source tools between various proprietary Unix version, especially with new releases.
That does not, however, bestow upon me, anything that I could call, with a straight face, "development abilities". I hold in my head none of the best practices having to do with programming that have accumulated over the 3 decades of my career, for example. Instead, I hold the Ops best practices. Being able to implement FizzBuzz in bash is neither necessary nor sufficient for software development.
> Developers must learn to operate their software in production.
I disagree here, as well, on behalf of developers.
I think you'll find having to learn what is, essentially, a completely separate, new, engineering discipline, in addition to software development, severely cuts into their productivity.
Unless I bring production to the developers, almost like bringing the upstairs downstairs in the cartoon pushbutton house[1]. I do actually feel it's a responsibility of Ops as part of Devops culture to create as frictionless (for their needs) a simulation of production as possible for developers. The practice has all sorts of benefits, including eliminating "works on my machine" debugging issues, that has been one of the rallying cries for containers.
[1] https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080403063620A...
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
wait, is that what devops means to you? That devs are doing ops?
That is the predominant definition, so yes I would assume just that. It’s more or less a logical following of infrastructure as code, because it’s the developers who write and push those files.
And I don't see DevOps becoming obsolete at all; just the other day I spend deploying apps with an ops guy, where neither of us could do it all on his own: the ops guy lacked understanding of the code bases, the endpoints to configure, and integration test procedures, me not having permissions to redeploy and view logs.
Re: Why Kubernetes Is the New Application Server
#170I think what a lot of people forget is that this is being driven by costs. Companies don't want to pay for disaster recovery, and it's cheaper to set up a k8's platform. The platform itself performs disaster recovery, so now that's one less cost for the company. It's all about saving money on DR. When these companies realize that developers can't handle doing ops AND complex business logic, maybe they'll rethink it.…
Cloud services is pretty much a business of huge marketing budgets and old-school lock-in strategies.