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

Kubernetes is hard

rcwz.pl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 164 posts

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#121

Post by preseinger »

tflinton wrote: post #95
rglover wrote: post #62

Kubernetes is hard because it's over-complicated and poorly designed. A lot of people don't want to hear that because it was created by The Almighty Google and people have made oodles of money being k8s gurus. After wasting two years chasing config files, constant deprecations, and a swamp of third-party dependencies that were supposedly "blessed" (all of which led to unnecessary downtime and stress), I swapped it al…

It’s not overly complicated, it’s just trying to serve everyone’s use cases. I’ve tried deploying to 10k servers with custom scripts in Jenkins, bamboo and AWS auto scaling groups but I’ve found kubernetes is the only tool that will elegantly handle a problem. You can probably write a script for the happy path but for a production service I’d bet my money on something that can handle all of the problems that come alo…

right

the thing is that a tool that's good for 10k servers isn't really good for 10 servers

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#122

Post by nathants »

the good new is, for the 95% of projects that can tolerate it, aws the good parts are actually both simple and easy[1].

it’s hard to find things you can’t build on s3, dynamo, lambda, and ec2.

if either compliance or a 5% project demand it, complicated solutions should be explored.

1. https://github.com/nathants/libaws

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#123

Post by mardifoufs »

nailer wrote: post #115
deathanatos wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People think it took less effort. Right up until you needed to do one of the very many things k8s implements. For example, in multiple previous employers, we had cronjobs: you just set up a cronjob on the server, I mean, really, how hard is that to do? And that server was a single point of failure: we can't just spin up a second server running crond, obviously, as then the job runs twice. Something would need to prov…

I have 0 results for PDB SRE on multiple search engines. What does it mean?

I think it's Pod Disruption Budgets, a kubernetes redundancy/resiliency related concept.

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#124

Post by [deleted] »

rglover wrote: post #94
rektide wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can setup a solid k3s cluster in 30 minutes. I'm sorry you had a hard time but just because you didn't succeed at your attempt doesn't mean it actually is super hard.

Setting it up is relatively easy, keeping it running consistently while navigating the schizophrenic levels of change and indecision on how things are done is another bag of chips. No need for passive aggression.

[deleted]

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#125

Post by swozey »

As an Infra person reading k8s posts on hackernews has got to be one of the most frustrating and pointless things to read on here. You all just regurgitate the same thing every post. It's even the same people, over and over again.

30% of you are developers who think K8s is the devil and too complex and difficult, 30% of you like it and enjoy using it, and another 20% of you have never touched it but have strong opinions on it.

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#126

Post by nailer »

mardifoufs wrote: post #123
nailer wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have 0 results for PDB SRE on multiple search engines. What does it mean?

I think it's Pod Disruption Budgets, a kubernetes redundancy/resiliency related concept.

> k8s permits me to evict workloads while obeying PDB — in previous orgs, "PDBs" (hell, we didn't even have a word to describe the concept)

Odd, the parent makes it seem like resource budgets weren’t a thing before k8s.

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#127

Post by morelisp »

ranger207 wrote: post #69
988747 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they did, but did it really take less effort than running it on Kubernetes?

Yes, until you've scaled enough that it wasn't. If you're deploying a dev or staging server or even prod for your first few thousand users then you can get by with a handful of servers and stuff. But a lot of stuff that works well on one or three servers starts working less well on a dozen servers, and it's around that point that the up-front difficulty of k8s starts to pay off with the lower long-term difficulty

Whatever crossover point might exist for Kubernetes it's not at a dozen servers, at the low end it's maybe 50. The fair comparison isn't against "yolo scp my php to /var/www", but any of the disciplined orchestration/containerization tools other than Kubernetes.

I ran ~40 servers across 3 DCs with about 1/3 of my time going to ops using salt and systemd.

The next company, we ran about 80 in one DC with one dedicated ops/infra person also embedded in the dev team + "smart hands" contracts in the DC. Today that runs in large part on Kubernetes; it's now about 150 servers and takes basically two full ops people disconnected from our dev completely, plus some unspecified but large percentage of a ~10 person "platform team", with a constant trickle of unsatisfying issues around storage, load balancing, operator compatibility, etc. Our day-to-day dev workflow has not gotten notably simpler.

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#128

Post by morelisp »

majormajor wrote: post #23
988747 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, they did, but did it really take less effort than running it on Kubernetes?

Definitely if they weren't running very complex services or their business tolerated an occasional maintenance window. The particular way Kubernetes can bite you is that it makes it much easy to start with far more complex setups - not necessarily much harder than to start with a simple setup! - but then you have to maintain and operate those complex setups forever, even if you don't need them that much. If you're gr…

The operational value of ~weekly ~30 min "maintenance windows" is wildly underestimated by teams today, and its business cost is wildly overestimated.

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#129

Post by beckingz »

markus_zhang wrote: post #96

I feel with AI, maybe in a couple of years it's going to trivial to deploy things on current infra stacks. AI can probably create whole range of Terraform scripts, deploy k8s and dockers and scale them automatically, with maybe a few humans as supervisor.

Automation doesn't need AI: Heroku 2 (whatever that will be named) will make it trivial to deploy things.

Re: Kubernetes is hard

#130

Post by hotpotamus »

markus_zhang wrote: post #96

I feel with AI, maybe in a couple of years it's going to trivial to deploy things on current infra stacks. AI can probably create whole range of Terraform scripts, deploy k8s and dockers and scale them automatically, with maybe a few humans as supervisor.

I suppose once the AI takes all the ops and dev jobs, we'll just have to seek employment doing the one thing AI can never seem to do - driving a vehicle.
Post reply on HN