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

Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–449 of 449 posts

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#441

Post by __jem »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #439
__jem wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key is that "containers" don't actually exist -- they're just processes running under a variety of different namespaces.

It's true that Docker isn't a first-class abstraction at the level of the Linux kernel, but BSD has jails, and Solaris has Zones. This is important in some respects, but I don't see that it informs things here. Containers are still 'a thing' regardless of how they're implemented.

Curious to learn more about how jails + zones are implemented. In Linux land, I find the notion that containers are a coherent abstraction really hinders developers from understanding how their application is deployed.

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#442

Post by diarrhea »

dilyevsky wrote: post #440
diarrhea wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend of mine is a contributor to k8s itself, and of course, this all comes incredibly easy to them. Following their recommendation, I gave it a shot for my single-person, single-node (!) homelab, all without using MicroK8s, k3s or similar. After a week of almost full-time work, I threw in the towel. Admittedly, I also had to learn concepts like reverse proxies alongside, too, so I was by no means well-equipped to…

Wait so running a kubeadm init and then removing a master taint took you whole week to figure out? How long ago was that?

No, setting up ingress did. Couldn't get reverse-proxying to work.

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#443

Post by bavell »

cies wrote: post #388
bavell wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I'm a solo technical founder and have been using k8s for all my hosting for 3+ years. It's so easy (for me) that I'm fine paying a premium for the managed service (GCP) since it saves me lots of time, my most valuable resource. I've already climbed most of the learning curve so YMMV, but as a team of one and dozens of WordPress, MySQL, and bespoke app servers, kuberenetes makes ops manageable so I can spend t…

Curious: do you have a single workload (like a WP site) that requires more than one physical computer in resources? I think that's the first thing with k8s: it all starts with an app that requires several physical nodes.

As in - a single workload that can't fit on a single physical machine? No I don't, although I certainly could if I needed to. Most of my workloads are either low-traffic WP sites or bespoke web-based business tools for clients with very bursty traffic.

Most of the value I get from k8s is the hands-off nature of it - I get slack notifications (prometheus+alertmanager) if anything is happening I need to address (e.g. workload down, node down, API not responding, etc). Otherwise I can safely ignore my cluster and know everything's good. Spinning up a new WP site takes 10m with backups, TLS, monitoring, etc built in.

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#444

Post by dilyevsky »

diarrhea wrote: post #442
dilyevsky wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait so running a kubeadm init and then removing a master taint took you whole week to figure out? How long ago was that?

No, setting up ingress did. Couldn't get reverse-proxying to work.

Ah ok. For a single node homelab setups I just throw everything on hostNetwork, second choice is NodePort (if there are port conflicts). In general k8s ingress on baremetal requires deeper understanding of its network design

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#445

Post by randomswede »

dilyevsky wrote: post #444
diarrhea wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, setting up ingress did. Couldn't get reverse-proxying to work.

Ah ok. For a single node homelab setups I just throw everything on hostNetwork, second choice is NodePort (if there are port conflicts). In general k8s ingress on baremetal requires deeper understanding of its network design

I would (probably) spin up an ingress-controller on ports 80 and 443, using hostNetwork, then use Ingresses from then on (and as it's a single-node cluster, just create a wildcard DNS A record, and possibly an anchor for other CNAMEs to point at (depending on DNS server) pointing at the IP said ingress-controller is running on).

Does mean that anything that upsets the ingress controller is an outage, but for experimentation, that's probably OK.

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#446

Post by ironmagma »

neonological wrote: post #385
dntrkv wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A good tool would be something like allows me to to get it up and running in a week just by reading some docs. Even better an hour. Could such a tool exist and replace Kubernetes? Yes. Does such a tool exist? No. Instead of complaining, why don't you build this tool? That's the problem I have with complainers.

You're complaining about me complaining. Instead of complaining why don't you build me the tool to stop me from complaining? It's the same reason why I'm not building the tool. That's the problem I have with complainers complaining about other complainers. Why don't you guys do something about my complaining rather then complain about it?

Why complain about the complainers? Because some complainers will never be happy no matter what the state of the world is. Ironically your solution (build more things) is the exact thing the complainers complain about with regard to the frontend world. They complain too many things have been built. You can’t ever satisfy everyone.

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#447

Post by monsieurbanana »

dontblink wrote: post #45
monsieurbanana wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm looking for something like that, but I'm afraid of using any google developer services, such as GCP, for personal projects. What if I breach their TOS somehow and get banned, or what if I didn't breach their TOS and still get banned? Can't afford to test my luck until I've finished migrating all my accounts off my gmail.

Why don't you just create a new Google Account specifically for this?

I'd also need a new credit card, I'm pretty sure they link accounts via shared CC. And even then, I'm pretty sure they still link accounts via other means. Did I link my gcp email in my android gmail app? Did I use the same IP address for both accounts? Or any of the thousand ways google has to know two accounts belong to the same person.

Honestly, creating a second google account might itself increase the chances of getting banned. Nobody knows with Google, and that's the problem.

Re: Google admits Kubernetes container tech is too complex

#449

Post by koheripbal »

cactus2093 wrote: post #427
koheripbal wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't we conflating compile complexities with runtime complexities here? There are plenty of open-source applications that offer pre-compiled binaries.

That difference isn't as black and white as you're making it out to be, sometimes it's just a design decision whether certain work is done at compile time or runtime. And both kinds of issues, runtime or compile-time, can be caused by the kinds of problems I'm talking about like unspecified dependencies.

This is why I wish github actually allowed automated compilation. That way we could all see exactly how binaries are compiled and don't need to setup a build environment for each open source project we want to build ourselves.
Post reply on HN