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

As Kubernetes grows, a startup ecosystem develops in its wake

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–156 of 156 posts

Re: As Kubernetes grows, a startup ecosystem develops in its wake

#151

Post by mlrtime »

atombender wrote: post #3

Kubernetes is one of those rare cases where the industry is rallying around a technologically sound platform that emerged from the trenches, and not something that was designed to create jobs for consultants. It's great. Right now, there's a bunch of fairly traditional players such as Red Hat, but none of them are in a position to mess it up. What I'm waiting for, though, is for a big player to do a modern, clean "Ku…

The biggest problem with GCP cannot create a private kubernetes cluster, it must have public interfaces. Why is this a requirement?

Re: As Kubernetes grows, a startup ecosystem develops in its wake

#152

Post by lobster_johnson »

mlrtime wrote: post #151
atombender wrote: post #3

Kubernetes is one of those rare cases where the industry is rallying around a technologically sound platform that emerged from the trenches, and not something that was designed to create jobs for consultants. It's great. Right now, there's a bunch of fairly traditional players such as Red Hat, but none of them are in a position to mess it up. What I'm waiting for, though, is for a big player to do a modern, clean "Ku…

The biggest problem with GCP cannot create a private kubernetes cluster, it must have public interfaces. Why is this a requirement?

Private clusters are in open beta: https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/how-to/priva....

Re: As Kubernetes grows, a startup ecosystem develops in its wake

#153

Post by lobster_johnson »

hodgesrm wrote: post #66
atombender wrote: post #3

Kubernetes is one of those rare cases where the industry is rallying around a technologically sound platform that emerged from the trenches, and not something that was designed to create jobs for consultants. It's great. Right now, there's a bunch of fairly traditional players such as Red Hat, but none of them are in a position to mess it up. What I'm waiting for, though, is for a big player to do a modern, clean "Ku…

Are you proposing that cloud vendors should do a better job of integrating Kubernetes with underlying infrastructure or are you saying there should be a Kubernetes-only cloud platform? If the former that's clearly desirable; you should be able for instance to set up networking between services without having to worry (much) about how it is implemented. If the latter, I am not so sure (or else I don't understand your…

I did describe both (Google could do a much better job with the integration on GCP/GKE), but by "Kubernetes first" I meant the latter.

Databases run fine on Kubernetes and have been doing fine since 1.7, and the meme that Docker is bad for stateful apps is a getting a bit old. The challenges are mostly the same as with running databases on a VM or bare metal. In particular, you need to know how to manage HA.

The weakest point is perhaps that Kubernetes's scheduler completely ignores disk I/O, so you have to bare careful to avoid sharing a node with multiple disk-heavy apps that will compete for resources. This is includes the file system cache; for example, PostgreSQL works best when it can rely on the OS to cache pages, so you don't want other apps (including Docker and Kubernetes themselves) to compete there.

That said, I wasn't saying that a hosted solution shouldn't also offer VMs. Just that Kubernetes should be the main entrypoint and control plane. And someone figured out a way to run VMs via Kubernetes [1], which is a neat example of a solution to the lack of integration I was complaining about earlier.

[1] https://www.mirantis.com/blog/virtlet-run-vms-as-kubernetes-...

Re: As Kubernetes grows, a startup ecosystem develops in its wake

#154

Post by user5994461 »

yongjik wrote: post #40
user5994461 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every tech companies with thousands of employees has google problems.

I highly doubt it. Even most of Google doesn't have "google problems". (Having to design things for "google scale" when you have no reason to was a popular gripe while I was there.) You don't go Google scale because it's cool to. You either do it because you absolutely have to, or you don't because, thankfully, you don't have to.

Companies don't go google scale, companies are google scale. It's not a choice, it's a fact they have to deal with.

Pick any large tech company, they have thousands of servers and countless customized software running. That's what is meant by google scale.

They need to manage that and they suck at it most of the time, they don't know what resources they own and they can't figure out what's running or where.

Re: As Kubernetes grows, a startup ecosystem develops in its wake

#155

Post by DanielDent »

StudentStuff wrote: post #27
lobster_johnson wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We were on DigitalOcean before GCP. They're okay. They're cheap, but can't really compare to GCP in terms of performance, stability, networking, object storage, etc. Their Kubernetes offering is also a GKE competitor, not a "Kubernetes first" cloud.

At least DO supports IPv6, for our application the 40ms latency penalty we encountered for half our customers when on GCP from not supporting IPv6 was not worth it. On that note, HE.net really peers with everyone over IPv6, even ISPs that won't peer with them on IPv4, its quite impressive how much better the routing can be on certain ISPs due to this!

Last I checked, DO still fails to allocate as little as a /64 to droplets. They provide a shared /64 out of which you are allowed to use 16 individual IP addresses.

In IPv6 land, that can introduce a lot of pointless complexity.

It would be reasonable for customers to be able to expect the ability to get /48s or /56s. Instead they don't even get a proper /64.

Re: As Kubernetes grows, a startup ecosystem develops in its wake

#156

Post by StudentStuff »

DanielDent wrote: post #155
StudentStuff wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least DO supports IPv6, for our application the 40ms latency penalty we encountered for half our customers when on GCP from not supporting IPv6 was not worth it. On that note, HE.net really peers with everyone over IPv6, even ISPs that won't peer with them on IPv4, its quite impressive how much better the routing can be on certain ISPs due to this!

Last I checked, DO still fails to allocate as little as a /64 to droplets. They provide a shared /64 out of which you are allowed to use 16 individual IP addresses. In IPv6 land, that can introduce a lot of pointless complexity. It would be reasonable for customers to be able to expect the ability to get /48s or /56s. Instead they don't even get a proper /64.

It is silly that most IPv6 enabled VM providers are stingy with IPv6 addresses, hopefully that will get better over time.
Post reply on HN