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

I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

benhouston3d.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 436 posts

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#31

Post by threeseed »

shrubble wrote: post #16
valenterry wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, let's say you want to deploy server instances. Let's keep it simple and say you want to have 2 instances running. You want to have zero-downtime-deployment. And you want to have these 2 instances be able to access configuration (that contains secrets). You want load balancing, with the option to integrate an external load balancer. And, last, you want to be able to run this setup both locally and also on at least…

Do you know of actual (not hypothetical) cases, where you could "flip a switch" and run the exact same Kubernetes setups on 2 different cloud providers?

Yes. I've worked on a number of very large banking and telco Kubernetes platforms.

All used multi-cloud and it was about 95% common code with the other 5% being driver style components for underlying storage, networking, IAM etc. Also using Kind/k3d for local development.

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#32

Post by osigurdson »

valenterry wrote: post #12
lkrubner wrote: post #3

Interesting that the mania for over-investment in devops is beginning to abate. Here on Hacker News I was a steady critic of both Docker and Kubernetes, going to at least 2017, but most of these posts were unpopular. I have to go back to 2019 to find one that sparked a conversation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20371961 The stuff I posted about Kubernetes did not draw a conversation, but I was simply document…

So, let's say you want to deploy server instances. Let's keep it simple and say you want to have 2 instances running. You want to have zero-downtime-deployment. And you want to have these 2 instances be able to access configuration (that contains secrets). You want load balancing, with the option to integrate an external load balancer. And, last, you want to be able to run this setup both locally and also on at least…

"Imagine you are in a rubber raft, you are surrounded by sharks, and the raft just sprung a massive leak - what do you do?". The answer, of course, is to stop imagining.

Most people on the "just use bash scripts and duct tape" side of things assume that you really don't need these features, that your customers are ok with downtime and generally that the project that you are working on is just your personal cat photo catalog anyway and don't need such features. So, stop pretending that you need anything at all and get a job at the local grocery store.

The bottom line is there are use cases, that involve real customers, with real money that do need to scale, do need uptime guarantees, do require diverse deployment environments, etc.

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#33

Post by devops99 »

shrubble wrote: post #16
valenterry wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, let's say you want to deploy server instances. Let's keep it simple and say you want to have 2 instances running. You want to have zero-downtime-deployment. And you want to have these 2 instances be able to access configuration (that contains secrets). You want load balancing, with the option to integrate an external load balancer. And, last, you want to be able to run this setup both locally and also on at least…

Do you know of actual (not hypothetical) cases, where you could "flip a switch" and run the exact same Kubernetes setups on 2 different cloud providers?

Both EKS (Amazon) and GKE (Google Cloud) run Cilium for the networking part of their managed Kubernetes offerings. That's the only real "hard part". From the users' point of view, the S3 buckets, the network-attached block devices, and compute (CRIO container runtime) are all the same.

You are using some other cloud provider or want uniformity there's https://Talos.dev

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#34

Post by tootubular »

valenterry wrote: post #12
lkrubner wrote: post #3

Interesting that the mania for over-investment in devops is beginning to abate. Here on Hacker News I was a steady critic of both Docker and Kubernetes, going to at least 2017, but most of these posts were unpopular. I have to go back to 2019 to find one that sparked a conversation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20371961 The stuff I posted about Kubernetes did not draw a conversation, but I was simply document…

So, let's say you want to deploy server instances. Let's keep it simple and say you want to have 2 instances running. You want to have zero-downtime-deployment. And you want to have these 2 instances be able to access configuration (that contains secrets). You want load balancing, with the option to integrate an external load balancer. And, last, you want to be able to run this setup both locally and also on at least…

My personal goto-solution for those requirements -- well 1 cloud provider, I'll follow up on that in a second -- would be using ECS or an equivalent service. I see the OP was a critic of Docker as well, but for me, ECS hits a sweet spot. I know the compute is at a premium, but at least in my use-cases, it's so far been a sensible trade.

About the 2 cloud providers bit. Is that a common thing? I get wanting migrate away from one for another, but having a need for running on more than 1 cloud simultaneously just seems alien to me.

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#36

Post by OtomotO »

esperent wrote: post #13
OtomotO wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just the hype moving on. Every generation has to make similar mistakes again and again. I am sure if we had the opportunity and the hype was there we would've used k8s in 2005 as well. The same thing is true for e.g. JavaScript on the frontend. I am currently migrating a project from React to HTMX. Suddenly there is no build step anymore. Some people were like: "That's possible?" Yes, yes it is and it turns out…

> Just as a carpenter doesn't use a hammer to saw, we as a profession should strive to use the right tool for the right job I think this is a gross misunderstanding of the complexity of tools available to carpenters. Use a saw. Sure, electric, hand powered? Bandsaw, chop saw, jigsaw, scrollsaw? What about using CAD to control the saw? > Suddenly there is no build step anymore How do you handle making sure the JS you…

Htmx works on all browsers I want to support.

I don't use any prefixed CSS and haven't for many years.

Last time I did knowingly and voluntarily was about a decade ago.

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#37

Post by santoshalper »

lkrubner wrote: post #3

Interesting that the mania for over-investment in devops is beginning to abate. Here on Hacker News I was a steady critic of both Docker and Kubernetes, going to at least 2017, but most of these posts were unpopular. I have to go back to 2019 to find one that sparked a conversation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20371961 The stuff I posted about Kubernetes did not draw a conversation, but I was simply document…

As an industry, we spent so much time sharpening our saw that we nearly forgot to cut down the tree.

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#38

Post by bruce511 »

valenterry wrote: post #12
lkrubner wrote: post #3

Interesting that the mania for over-investment in devops is beginning to abate. Here on Hacker News I was a steady critic of both Docker and Kubernetes, going to at least 2017, but most of these posts were unpopular. I have to go back to 2019 to find one that sparked a conversation: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20371961 The stuff I posted about Kubernetes did not draw a conversation, but I was simply document…

So, let's say you want to deploy server instances. Let's keep it simple and say you want to have 2 instances running. You want to have zero-downtime-deployment. And you want to have these 2 instances be able to access configuration (that contains secrets). You want load balancing, with the option to integrate an external load balancer. And, last, you want to be able to run this setup both locally and also on at least…

That's an interesting set of requirements though. If that is indeed your set of requirements then perhaps Kubernetes is a good choice.

But the set seems somewhat arbitrary. Can you reduce it further? What if you don't require 2 cloud providers? What if you don't need zero-downtime?

Indeed given that you have 4 machines (2 instances, x 2 providers) could a human manage this? Is Kubernetes overkill?

I ask this merely to wonder. Naturally if you are rolling out hundreds of machines you should, and no doubt by then you have significant revenue (and thus able to pay for dedicated staff) , but where is the cross-over?

Because to be honest most startups don't have enough traction to need 2 servers, never mind 4, never mind 100.

I get the aspiration to be large. I get the need to spend that VC cash. But I wonder if Devops is often just premature and that focus would be better spent getting paying customers.

Re: I Didn't Need Kubernetes, and You Probably Don't Either

#39

Post by osigurdson »

caseyohara wrote: post #28
valenterry wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, let's say you want to deploy server instances. Let's keep it simple and say you want to have 2 instances running. You want to have zero-downtime-deployment. And you want to have these 2 instances be able to access configuration (that contains secrets). You want load balancing, with the option to integrate an external load balancer. And, last, you want to be able to run this setup both locally and also on at least…

I think you are proving the point; there are very, very few applications that need to run on two cloud providers. If you do, sure, use Kubernetes if that makes your job easier. For the other 99% of applications, it’s overkill. Apart from that requirement, all of this is very doable with EC2 instances behind an ALB, each running nginx as a reverse proxy to an application server with hot restarting (e.g. Puma) launched…

To me that sounds harder than just using EKS. Also, other people are more likely to understand how it works, can run it in other environments (e.g. locally), etc.
Post reply on HN