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

HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

foundationinc.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 91 posts

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#31

Post by moralestapia »

sidlls wrote: post #26
truffdog wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The most popular tool in HashiCorp's ecosystem that wasn't written by them was written by a consulting firm who hated HashiCorp's UX Which tool is that? On a related note, Vault has a really excellent API. A joy.

We’re using different Vaults it seems. HashiCorp’s tech is a mess of over engineering, poor UX, and insufficient documentation.

>HashiCorp’s tech is a mess of over engineering, poor UX, and insufficient documentation.

Second that. Very steep learning curve for some use cases that could be accomplished in a much easier way. Another kubernetes in disguise.

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#32

Post by tommaybe »

tjr225 wrote: post #15
ec109685 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kubernetes is managed by a foundation so less of a risk than a tool owned by one company.

Kubernetes absolutely eats the HashiStack lunch. I think they’re aware of this. That’s why I think HashiCorp invested so much VC funding into their SaaS offerings: they know consul, vault, and nomad are a huge pain in the ass to configure and manage, particularly in support of each other. It’s all a little bit more agnostic than k8s but If you actually run consul + vault + nomad in production you know that managing i…

So far for me Nomad has been very pleasant to work with. We are a small startup with just three devs - and are running multi-region Nomad in production for a few weeks now.

We migrated around 20 services within a couple of days, coming from a mixture of all sorts of AWS services and Hetzner infra.

Documentation was fairly good and the community was helpful.

(This is without consul or vault, we use native service discovery so far)

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#33

Post by namose »

schainks wrote: post #21
jen20 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm assuming this is Terragrunt, which itself perpetuates all kinds of horrific practices which are absolutely unnecessary if you apply basic software engineering principles to infrastructure as code/config.

Where does it say Terragrunt is part of Hashicorp?

> The most popular tool in HashiCorp's ecosystem that wasn't written by them was written by a consulting firm who hated HashiCorp's UX

This is the initial comment about Terragrunt, which doesn't say that

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#34

Post by sidlls »

Axsuul wrote: post #22
tjr225 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kubernetes absolutely eats the HashiStack lunch. I think they’re aware of this. That’s why I think HashiCorp invested so much VC funding into their SaaS offerings: they know consul, vault, and nomad are a huge pain in the ass to configure and manage, particularly in support of each other. It’s all a little bit more agnostic than k8s but If you actually run consul + vault + nomad in production you know that managing i…

As a counterpoint I manage multiple HashiStack clusters in production with little overhead — it's not a nightmare. I am a Kubernetes refugee and Nomad is such a better experience with batteries included. Nomad now has its own service discovery (along with secure variables coming in 1.4.0) so you won't actually need Consul and Vault anymore. This is perfect for smaller deployments like on a Raspberry Pi.

Are your clusters at the same scale as Robinhood or Roblox? We’re talking many millions of inbound requests per second generating multiples of that on internal service calls.

Nomad, Consul and Vault work find at small to medium scales. Sometimes. If things are working really well and there aren’t any real problems on the network. It’s very fragile, though, and tends to shit itself under the slightest bit of abnormal pressure.

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#35

Post by jen20 »

namose wrote: post #33
schainks wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where does it say Terragrunt is part of Hashicorp?

> The most popular tool in HashiCorp's ecosystem that wasn't written by them was written by a consulting firm who hated HashiCorp's UX This is the initial comment about Terragrunt, which doesn't say that

Indeed: it says the exact opposite.

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#36

Post by lapser »

datatrashfire wrote: post #30
Axsuul wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of HashiCorp's products have splendid UX — what are you on about? Have you actually used their other products aside from Terraform, which I'm assuming you're referring to?

I don't understand why some people hate teraform so much.

Because it sucks. It has all the quirks and a whole lot of mess. That's terraform. Terraform Enterprise and Cloud must have been developed as a fuck you to enterprises, because it absolutely sucks.

I work with them daily, and have done so for 4 years now. It still sucks.

Unfortunately it's (Terraform, not TFE/TFC) the best in its class, and quite frankly I'm not smart to solve its issues.

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#37

Post by kfrzcode »

moralestapia wrote: post #31
sidlls wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re using different Vaults it seems. HashiCorp’s tech is a mess of over engineering, poor UX, and insufficient documentation.

>HashiCorp’s tech is a mess of over engineering, poor UX, and insufficient documentation. Second that. Very steep learning curve for some use cases that could be accomplished in a much easier way. Another kubernetes in disguise.

k8s in disguise? Vault? Have you used either of these tools?

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#38

Post by kfrzcode »

jen20 wrote: post #17
truffdog wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The most popular tool in HashiCorp's ecosystem that wasn't written by them was written by a consulting firm who hated HashiCorp's UX Which tool is that? On a related note, Vault has a really excellent API. A joy.

I'm assuming this is Terragrunt, which itself perpetuates all kinds of horrific practices which are absolutely unnecessary if you apply basic software engineering principles to infrastructure as code/config.

Could you express more? There's gotta be a good use case for Terragrunt; they have been useful so far for me

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#39

Post by kfrzcode »

yomkippur wrote: post #25
bayareabadboy wrote: post #11

I use terraform everyday, and I’m not exactly Warren Buffet but it is kinda funny juxtaposing this article with the current stock price and trajectory since IPO.

I never use terraform. I use web console first and then if something really needs to be automated I use bash script to string together aws cli. If anything gets more complex than that I do not automate it, instead I use CDK to essentially write infrastructure just like any code. There is a lot of time wasted in learning a DSL and than wrestling with the limits of what it can do. For most infrastructure scaffolding yo…

Enjoy your zealotry!

Re: HashiCorp’s multi-product strategy

#40

Post by kfrzcode »

tuckerman wrote: post #8
ec109685 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kubernetes is managed by a foundation so less of a risk than a tool owned by one company.

I think one way in which it plays out opposite to this is that Kubernetes, among companies I’ve talked to, is being deployed as EKS or GKE with cloud provider specific extensions/integrations while Nomad is much much easier to self manage on top of bare VMs. Even being owned by a single company, there is something about being to self host that feels more “free”. Obviously this could make a 180 easily because of how m…

Single point of failure!
Post reply on HN