>It seems rather that you don't know what kubernetes is.
The company, for which I helped migrating to k8s, pays me 6 figures to keep maintaining it, thinks otherwise (also look at my username ;) ). All of our developers love it because it replaced some weird hacked together deployment stuff.
Which part do you think he is right or wrong?
It just seems that in every thread people moan about k8s. But it seems that it's usually people who are overwhelmed by it, which is a legitimate reason not to use it. But just saying that it's generally bad is what starting to annoy me a bit.
That was pretty much my experience. From a distance, it looks over-engineered. Once I started using it in my personal projects and at work in production, it makes a lot of sense and it’s far easier than people make it out to be.
I’m currently helping my employer switch everything to kubernetes and we’re replacing a lot of really, truly over-engineered trash.
I will say I do hate yaml but there aren’t a ton of choices, tbh.
Hi - since you're on credentials, I hold CKA, CKAD, and CKS.
I have spent my entire Kubernetes career unfucking the people three degrees removed from you who hear advocacy like this and say wow, yeah, the people with gripes about Kubernetes are just moaning and overwhelmed. Meanwhile, a team at an unnamed government agency just allowed Accenture to con them into turning multiplayer Excel, a process which used to take two humans about a week, into an $18 million annual AWS system funded by the U.S. taxpayer. Because of choices-du-jour, including Spark and Kubernetes.
It just seems that in every thread people moan about people moaning about Kubernetes and then project their interpretation of what that moaning is after starting from the presupposition that it's moaning. If you'd instead listen to the other side instead of the basically-crypto-advocacy-train-choo-choo of "if you have gripes, you just don't get it," you'd understand the cons a little better. Such as my entire decade of professional Kubernetes consulting being every single computing project, including in the Fortune 500, the Department of Defense, and at second-tier VC startups in the Bay Area, being a complete operational disaster that's bleeding capital like it's free.
Capital is no longer free. Read the news.
I now wield my certifications to advise against Kubernetes in any capacity because it is a strategic risk unless resourced exactly right and funded exactly right (which is impossible to justify on infra budgets), simply because of the experience I have watching people like you come in, explain to leadership that it's fine, and then ride that salary until it doesn't suit you anymore and leave a system that takes 5-6 FTEs to comfortably administer on whoever gets to pick up the ball. For every comment you see on Hacker News where someone like you is saying "yeah, Kubernetes runs great for us," they're (a) leaving out the operational toil, particularly in the break-fix department where the entire Unix paradigm changes and (b) not realizing that there are five other teams like them that are completely underwater while trying to put out their overengineered tire fire.
And remember, nearly every project using Kubernetes is trying to do multiplayer Excel. That's it. And the more we invest in trying to make the world's most overcomplex computing system do that use case even harder, the less we think about "isn't there a simpler way to do all of this from first principles?"
The company, for which I helped migrating to k8s, pays me 6 figures to keep maintaining it, thinks otherwise (also look at my username ;) ). All of our developers love it because it replaced some weird hacked together deployment stuff.
Which part do you think he is right or wrong?
It just seems that in every thread people moan about k8s. But it seems that it's usually people who are overwhelmed by it, which is a legitimate reason not to use it. But just saying that it's generally bad is what starting to annoy me a bit.