Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nomad vs. Kubernetes

nomadproject.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 369 posts

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#111

Post by tazjin »

papito wrote: post #104
gilbetron wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Being written in a language that isn't well-suited to large projects and refactoring efforts doesn't help either. How is Go not suited to those? I'm not seeing it - and are you comparing Go to Java or C++?

Go is a very hard language to work on as a team. It does not push a lot of conventions on you, and when it does, they just seem weird and anachronistic. Even the original k8s codebase was notoriously horrible in Go, and that was "from the source". Ironically, HashiCorp has a better Go codebase, and that's where I picked best practices from, not from Google. The problem with Go is that the Googlers fail to challenge s…

> The problem with Go is that the Googlers fail to challenge some of the design decisions. The giants of computer science working on it at the company cannot be questioned, and that just leads to a broken feedback process.

Well, they can be questioned but they're not very receptive to it, so most people don't bother. During my time at Alphabet I didn't see much use of Go anyways, other than in glue tooling (including a horrific large-scale incident due to non-obvious behaviour of Go code in such a glue tool).

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#112

Post by capableweb »

_wldu wrote: post #67

I have never deployed or built a K8s cluster, but recently I moved about a dozen AWS ECS Fargate workloads into a K8s cluster that a colleague of mine has setup. I was surprised. I really like it (from the perspective of a user/developer). I deploy my apps by updating a simple yaml file in a git repo. All my other practices (vim, go code with standard Makefiles, docker container image registry) are unchanged. I also…

While interesting in itself, I'm not sure how this is relevant to this Nomad blogpost, unless you tried Nomad before starting to use Kubernetes and went with Kubernetes anyways.

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#114

Post by peterthehacker »

jnsaff2 wrote: post #34

I liked Mesos when I worked on it, and it's been replaced by more modern tools like Nomad, but every time I have to work on k8s it's .. well it's being promoted like a cult, has a cult following and I think the whole thing is set up to suck up complexity and layering. How do you deploy a thing to run on k8s? One would think you deploy a manifest to it and that's it. Like yaml or json or hcl or whatever. No. The built…

So much flamebait. These kinds of comments aren’t good for anyone.

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#115

Post by proxysna »

mkopinsky wrote: post #99

So far I've kept things simple, avoided k8s/HashiStack/etc by using docker compose with a simple docker-compose.yml for each server. This has been working well, but I'm starting to feel the pain points - HA requires copy-pasting yaml, I need to specify which services are on each server, and so on. What's the simplest next step I can take? I'd like something with (close to) the simplicity of docker compose, but ideall…

You should be ok with consul, ansible and templating your docker-compose files. Might take some time to set it all up, but should be ok.

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#117

Post by throwaway923840 »

jeswin wrote: post #94

Despite its reputation, Kubernetes is actually quite easy to master for simple use cases. And affordable enough for more complex ones. The fundamental abstractions are as simple as they can be, representing concepts that you'd already be familiar with in a datacenter environment. A cluster has nodes (machines), and you can run multiple pods (which is the smallest deployable unit on the cluster) on each node. A pod ru…

They're both complex. But one of them has 10 times the components than the other, and requires you to use them. One of them is very difficult to install - so much so that there are a dozen different projects intended just to get it running. While the other is a single binary. And while one of them is built around containers (and all of the complexity that comes with interacting with them / between them), the other one doesn't have to use containers at all.

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#118

Post by andrewstuart2 »

jeswin wrote: post #94

Despite its reputation, Kubernetes is actually quite easy to master for simple use cases. And affordable enough for more complex ones. The fundamental abstractions are as simple as they can be, representing concepts that you'd already be familiar with in a datacenter environment. A cluster has nodes (machines), and you can run multiple pods (which is the smallest deployable unit on the cluster) on each node. A pod ru…

From a system architecture perspective, kubernetes is very complex since it handles a multitude of complexities, but that's why it _can_ be very simple from a user's perspective. Most of the complexity can be ignored (until you want it).

It's the same reason I still like to use postgres when I can versus NoSQL until I know I need the one feature I may not be able to achieve with postgres: automatic sharding for massive global scale. The rest of the features postgres (and friends) give easily (ACID etc) are very tricky to get right in a distributed system.

It's also the same reason bash is great for tasks and small automated programs, but kind of terrible for more complex needs. The primitives are super simple, easy to grok, and crazy productive at that scale, but other languages give tools to more easily handle the complexities that start to emerge when things get more complicated.

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#119

Post by wvh »

jnsaff2 wrote: post #34

I liked Mesos when I worked on it, and it's been replaced by more modern tools like Nomad, but every time I have to work on k8s it's .. well it's being promoted like a cult, has a cult following and I think the whole thing is set up to suck up complexity and layering. How do you deploy a thing to run on k8s? One would think you deploy a manifest to it and that's it. Like yaml or json or hcl or whatever. No. The built…

Some parts of Kubernetes are perhaps unnecessary complex and we should keep our eyes open for alternatives and learn from different approaches, but deploying to Kubernetes really does not have to be that difficult unless you make it so.

Plain manifests in a Git repository will do, and let something like Flux apply them for consistency. It really isn't harder than SSH and ad-hoc scripts or Ansible.

Re: Nomad vs. Kubernetes

#120

Post by ninkendo »

sheeshkebab wrote: post #57
heinrichhartman wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do you deploy a thing to run on k8s? kubectrl apply -f deploy.yaml should work, no? What forces you to use the sugar-coating?

Maybe bc no one uses that in reality and use helm instead?

The first time I used helm was to set up JenkinsCI on a k8s cluster on AWS, and in the default configuration, it setup a public-internet ELB listener (with type=LoadBalancer) for Jenkins' internal JNLP port. Which pretty much means the public internet has root access to your jenkins cluster, by default.

I had crypto miners using my k8s cluster within a couple of hours.

That was also the last time I used helm.

Post reply on HN