Re:Kubernetes Failure Stories
by tepidandroid on Wednesday June 12, 2019 @03:15PM
(#20168247)
The same can be said of Hashistack (Consul, Nomad, Vault). Orders of magnitude simpler with the obvious tradeoff of being less featureful.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Consul and Vault offer functionality that Kubernetes is completely lacking, though.
Is it worth going with those? I'm torn between deploying stuff on Kubernetes (on a managed control plane, of course, which you can get for free nowadays with providers as long as you use their own machines) and rolling my own with the Hashistack.
Re:Kubernetes Failure Stories
by tepidandroid on Thursday June 13, 2019 @09:35PM
(#20179980)
Depends on your use-case, really. IMO, Hashistack is fine if you have well-defined requirements. You can pick and choose the components you need (including non Hashi stuff) and integrate them with relative ease, keeping resource footprint and operational complexity at a minimum. I’ve found that it’s quite easy to pinpoint problems when they arise.
Kubernetes is more of an everything-and-the-kitchen-sink approach that you can’t really outgrow but because of its monolithic design, debugging can be quite challenging. It does, however, come with a much larger and much more active community that you can go to for help.