And I didn't say that.
We had all of these problems with self developed automatisation.
It still was garbage.
K8s just solves those issues out if the box.
We had all of these problems with self developed automatisation.
It still was garbage.
K8s just solves those issues out if the box.
- Only get servers with IPMI so you can remote reboot / power cycle them.
- Have said servers netboot so they always run the newest OS image.
- Make sure said OS image has a config that isn't broken so you don't get full inodes and so it cycles logs.
- Have the OS image include journalbeat to ship logs.
- Have your health checks trigger a recovery script that restarts or moves containers using one of a myriad of tools; monitoring isn't exactly a new discipline.
Yes, it means you have to have a build process for OS images. Yes, it means you need to pick a monitoring system. And yes, it means you need to decide a scheduling policy.
I wrote an orchestrator pre-K8S that was fewer LOC than the yaml config for my home test K8S cluster. Writing a custom orchestrator is often not hard, depending on your workload, - writing a generic one is.
K8S provides one opinionated version of what people build manually, and when it's a good fit, it's great. When it isn't, I all to often see people spend more time trying to figure out how to make it work for them than it would've taken them to do it from scratch.
My experience still counts for something and the example with those 700 VMS is something I didn't just saw once.
If I understand it right: VMS were not there because people needed VMS they were there because people needed compute.
We moved everything to k8s and we were able to do this because k8s can
For me it's now much more about proper platform engineering and giving teams more flexibility again knowing that the k8s platform is significantly more stable than what I have ever seen before.