3 ms·

Oh this is awesome, will take a look. I’ve had rough experiences with Kubeflow in the past, recently I’ve been using Coder workspaces https://coder.com/ https:/

by skreem 2mo ago

Oh this is awesome, will take a look. I’ve had rough experiences with Kubeflow in the past, recently I’ve been using Coder workspaces https://coder.com/ https://coder.com/ and it’s pretty good but less ML/AI integrated (but, stitched together with Ray autoscaling nodes it can get really nice)

oesa 2mo ago
Yeah, Kubeflow can be rough, we've been down that road too as well. I really like Coder, but one thing for the life of me I couldn't figure out is that even with the self-hosted version, why does anything have to go through their infra? With trailer.dev our explicit goal is to have a fulfilling user experience for the following scenario: - You have servers you own or rent - You have a team that want some persistent developer workspaces that are running on that server - You run our 30mb + the server side somewhere and boom, you can have your team(s) work on your project. If you want we (the trailer team) can run the server component for you, but that's it. I tried spinning up a coder instance just now again, with docker, and I'm being tunneled through US East Pittsburgh with 117ms of latency for a local dev environment tool :(
- skreem 2mo ago
  Oh interesting… I don’t manage it, but one of our teams does fully self host it Have you tried setting CODER_ACCESS_URL to your own hostnamE/IP? I think that disables the tunnel setup
  - kylecarbs 2mo ago
    (joining very late to the thread, but for future readers) Coder requires zero internet-access, many of our customers run entirely airgapped. We _currently_ create an HTTP tunnel for first-time users to their Coder instance for a smooth setup. This removes the need to expose their deployment for workspace infra (e.g. EC2 VMs) just to try it out. We could communicate this more clearly in our UX, which I'll fix up!

3 ms·

Oh this is awesome, will take a look. I’ve had rough experiences with Kubeflow in the past, recently I’ve been using Coder workspaces https://coder.com/ https:/

by skreem 2mo ago

oesa 2mo ago
Yeah, Kubeflow can be rough, we've been down that road too as well. I really like Coder, but one thing for the life of me I couldn't figure out is that even with the self-hosted version, why does anything have to go through their infra? With trailer.dev our explicit goal is to have a fulfilling user experience for the following scenario: - You have servers you own or rent - You have a team that want some persistent developer workspaces that are running on that server - You run our 30mb + the server side somewhere and boom, you can have your team(s) work on your project. If you want we (the trailer team) can run the server component for you, but that's it. I tried spinning up a coder instance just now again, with docker, and I'm being tunneled through US East Pittsburgh with 117ms of latency for a local dev environment tool :(
- skreem 2mo ago
  Oh interesting… I don’t manage it, but one of our teams does fully self host it Have you tried setting CODER_ACCESS_URL to your own hostnamE/IP? I think that disables the tunnel setup
  - kylecarbs 2mo ago
    (joining very late to the thread, but for future readers) Coder requires zero internet-access, many of our customers run entirely airgapped. We _currently_ create an HTTP tunnel for first-time users to their Coder instance for a smooth setup. This removes the need to expose their deployment for workspace infra (e.g. EC2 VMs) just to try it out. We could communicate this more clearly in our UX, which I'll fix up!