91–100 of 131 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gaslighting has almost entirely lost its original meaning because people use it for anything now. Drives me crazy.
Same with "toxic" which now just means "any speech I don't like"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same with "toxic" which now just means "any speech I don't like"
Calling something toxic, problematic, or gaslighting is a great way to silence further discussion
Paul Graham - What You Can’t Say
They run OpenShift because they want Kubernetes with it's organisational advantages on-prem, while having the support they're used to. With the exception of Azure, none of the cloud providers can offer this.
RedHat saw this coming, and understood that if k8s became big in the cloud-space, someone needed to address that enterpricy market. If they could get there first, AND at the same time put a second big name behind this new tech giving it more viability, it also gave them more push.
But then again, the rest of the article showed the author understands very little of Kubernetes at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, I am not sure when heterodox is a good thing or bad thing. Maybe you could qualify that for me. Well Gmail is kinda stupid. I mean they are reading your emails.
They really aren’t.
"We also collect the content you create, upload, or receive from others when using our services. This includes things like email you write and receive, photos and videos you save, docs and spreadsheets you create, and comments you make on YouTube videos." Their words not mine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the heavy lifting to implement containers was done by the kernel developer community and projects like LXC. Yet, docker and kubernetes are very much hype/marketing driven and took away a lot of recognition from the kernel developers.
A non trivial chunk of kernel work for containers was upstreaming of Google kernel patches. To the point of a throwdown on LKML when Lennart tried to "lay claim" to cgroups v2 as "owned solely by systemd", and got a rather... Funny response.
And only because google really needed it for internal use.
Many other companies, orgs and individual contributors contributed bigger chunks of work but you don't hear people praising them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi danpalmer, I kind of hit on this in the article. How do you think abstracting away the server adds any value in "public cloud"? Where you can get bespoke VMs, with no concern for the underlying hardware? Can you elaborate?
I can tell you what it does for me: Full disk on your VM? Nope. Storage is abstracted away. Your server will not fill up anymore. Only one service might break which might heal itself. Is your VM/node broken? It will heal itself because you throw it away and the new VM/node is fixed. It enforces the abstraction of Service and VM. You will not install normal software on that VM just because you can. You don't need to g…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still don't get your motivation on writing your criticism. What is your endgoal? Getting people not to like k8s? Because you don't like to work with it? To push people away from k8s? How do you add value to the current infrastructure/platform ecosystem by 'hating' on it without providing something different? Of course companies present this k8s story as a successful thing. Why would that documentary be negative? An…
I think the emperor is wearing no clothes. I want to move that discussion forward. I feel it is inevitable.
It is trustworthy because it is FOSS, certified and lots of companies use it because of this.
Lets take Java vs. PHP: PHP is developed by one group of people. Thats it. There was facebook hhvm/php alternative which then became something independent of php. Quite frustrating if you were hoping that Facebook gives back to the community.
Then take java: you have a spec, you have a reference implementation and then you have validated alternatives of it. At least you had this for a long time on the JavaEE area and with the oracle support thing, you also now have independent JVMs. This makes Java, in my opinion, better. This makes it a great platform, easy to migrate out of one ecosystem and it prevents 'vendor lock-in'.
Nomad is from hashicorp. You have mesos which works well as well. But no normal cloud provider provides nomad or mesos as a service. They provide their own thing. App Engine, Heroku etc.
Kubernetes broke through this. Lots of smaller cloud providers provide a managed kubernetes. You can see kubernetes here as the universal appengine if you like. Google provides Autogke. Their managed kubernetes service which abstracts away k8s even further. This interface, k8s provides, allows you to run your k8s based workloads at home, onprem, in private, in any other cloud provider AND on Google.
Instead of having Vendor lock-in it switches the operation model of those companies: They can't lock you in as easily before so they need to make the best offering for it. It switches the mental model and the level of competition to a more consumer/customer focused level.
It is very similar on a mental model switch as what Microsoft did with linux: Instead of hating against linux, they embrase it now and incorporate it. I never considered windows as a good developer OS just because of the missing shell support or the required workarounds or the non native cli feeling it gave you. Now i can use WSL2 and it becomes a real option.
For me, k8s is THE FOSS infrastructure abstraction layer. Protected and aligned through the CNCF and certification process.
Btw. the CNCF is from the Linux Foundation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can tell you what it does for me: Full disk on your VM? Nope. Storage is abstracted away. Your server will not fill up anymore. Only one service might break which might heal itself. Is your VM/node broken? It will heal itself because you throw it away and the new VM/node is fixed. It enforces the abstraction of Service and VM. You will not install normal software on that VM just because you can. You don't need to g…
None of this is true.
Feel free to actually write more than 'None of this is true.' in a way that a discussion is actually possible.
Tx :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's true, but not a particularly interesting fact. For example, if you use GKE (Google Cloud's K8s offering), you attach your K8s cluster to an auto-scaling node pool and it handles (de)provisioning of your VMs for you. You essentially don't care about the VMs, there's essentially no overhead. If you are in a private cloud, this also creates a good "API boundary" between the team responsible for running hardware,…
I would say it is an interesting fact, since it's this "good 'API boundary'" that, as you said, enables one to separate concerns, be it between different teams in an organisation or between a service provider and its users. Yes, you don't need Kubernetes to come up with your own implicit or explicit API boundaries, and these might not be needed for smaller projects. I agree that Kubernetes is often used where it's no…
You're right though, the abstraction layer is very interesting for _enabling_ public clouds, and for private cloud team ownership.