| ▲ | leetrout 7 hours ago | |
Over 12 years of popular usage at this point. I still think it's inappropriate for ~90% of the companies using it. | ||
| ▲ | asa400 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |
Apologies in advance this turned in to a bit of a rant of violent agreement. For most places k8s is a complete boat anchor. Ends up being a huge complication and sap on product momentum. Can’t tell you how many outages I’ve seen from k8s misconfiguration and misunderstanding. In no world would I consider k8s to be boring, I can’t understand how all of these shops have convinced themselves that k8s specifically is the level of abstraction at which they want to be interacting with their infrastructure. I think k8s happens because a large number of devs look at Heroku-like platforms and bristle at the notion that they could ever be expected to intentionally constrain their brilliant system designs into preexisting, Heroku-style shapes. It’s ego on some level. That, and a ton engineers are still incredibly bad at trading off hardware cost and compensation/complexity/organizational cost. “Heroku will cost us $2000/month, running k8s on our own hardware will only cost $400/month.” Ok, but your team’s total comp is costing the company on the order of $1MM/year. Is saving $1,600/month on infrastructure to spend $20k/month on dev time a good deal? This happens all the freaking time, it’s crazy how little devs value their own time. | ||
| ▲ | rzerowan 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Ideally a techthat is not core to the business goals should neither occupy dev/ops time managing it or be so complex that its failure modes are cryptic. It should get out of the devs way and be easy to grok in case of failures. | ||