5 ms·

K8s provides a cloud-agnostic solution for (mostly stateless) configuration management. You have to record which ports your applications listen on, which subdo

K8s provides a cloud-agnostic solution for (mostly stateless) configuration management. You have to record which ports your applications listen on, which subdomains are used for what, how to access that storage bucket with the data files in it etc. somewhere. The moment you have more than a couple of individual services managing this all by hand becomes a nightmare. You need a really strong culture of good practice to make sure that the exact production config actually ends up in source control. You can be a k8s expert, or an expert in your own home-spun configuration management/git-ops workflow. But not having any workflow here just isn't an option in my opinion. You too easily end up with spaghetti infrastructure that everybody is too scared to touch. With k8s I can take my repo of yaml and change cloud providers in an afternoon.

XorNot 4y ago
The problem is kubernetes doesn't include any notions of obvious things I'd like to do like parameterizing my deployment - even though all the providers want to sell me kubernetes clusters as a service.
- FridgeSeal 4y ago
  Out of curiosity, what kind of things are you looking for here? “Parametrising what” I guess is the question.
  - XorNot 4y ago
    Off the top of my head? Namespaces, base images, configMaps (this should be pretty obvious), monitoring. Now all of this can be done, but Kubernetes does this thing where it talks extensively about applications and then goes "oh so anyway, um, like, I guess just put that stuff in git?" Which you can but with what separation? The way my configuration mounts to my applications is probably somewhat application determined, but "where" stuff runs is infrastructure. None of it matters because K8S doesn't have an answer for any of it: no standard for emitting state from clusters to allow self-configuration, no system to define axes of freedom in configuration shape, no well defined system for say, plugging your applications network requirements into perhaps a clusters policy of what networking should be. No way to expose a set of permissions for reconfiguring my infrastructure to the cluster so RBAC can define a sensible ops model. K8S is essentially a platform-for-platforms which is why it feels complicated: the moment you have it setup, you realize just how much is actually missing if you try to use it like it bills itself as.

XorNot 4y ago

The problem is kubernetes doesn't include any notions of obvious things I'd like to do like parameterizing my deployment - even though all the providers want to sell me kubernetes clusters as a service.

FridgeSeal 4y ago
Out of curiosity, what kind of things are you looking for here? “Parametrising what” I guess is the question.
- XorNot 4y ago
  Off the top of my head? Namespaces, base images, configMaps (this should be pretty obvious), monitoring. Now all of this can be done, but Kubernetes does this thing where it talks extensively about applications and then goes "oh so anyway, um, like, I guess just put that stuff in git?" Which you can but with what separation? The way my configuration mounts to my applications is probably somewhat application determined, but "where" stuff runs is infrastructure. None of it matters because K8S doesn't have an answer for any of it: no standard for emitting state from clusters to allow self-configuration, no system to define axes of freedom in configuration shape, no well defined system for say, plugging your applications network requirements into perhaps a clusters policy of what networking should be. No way to expose a set of permissions for reconfiguring my infrastructure to the cluster so RBAC can define a sensible ops model. K8S is essentially a platform-for-platforms which is why it feels complicated: the moment you have it setup, you realize just how much is actually missing if you try to use it like it bills itself as.