[anonymous_fun]

Not an expert, nor to take anything from Erlang (was amazed at how robust RabbitMQ was first time I stress tested it) but fault tolerance seems to be a part of OTP. To me, k8s ~ OTP, GO ~ Erlang, and Erlang syntax is a bit easier than GoLang, but might just be the way I was brought up.

[masklinn]

OTP is the standard distribution & library of Erlang, and most of the fault tolerance is either that or the core Erlang runtime e.g. supervisors are part of the standard library[0] and the underlying systems are basically built into the language[1].

Distribution is likewise built into the runtime and language, most of the distribution-related BIFs are not only part of the "erlang" module/namespace but also part of its "prelude" (auto-imported in all modules by default).

So no, it is absolutely nothing like kubernetes in relation to go.

[0] http://erlang.org/doc/man/supervisor.html

[1] http://erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/processes.html#id8861...

[sheeshkebab]

I think parent was referring to similarity of k8s to OTP from user's prospective..

[zzzcpan]

People just want k8s to be that marvelous, to have strong supervision tree architecture. I want the same for systemd too. But sadly it's all mess.

[dozzie]

> [...] but fault tolerance seems to be a part of OTP.

Yes, mostly, but the thing is that OTP was possible at all because of how the portions provided by the language and the runtime play together. You cannot replicate the OTP as it is in Go because Go's runtime is lacking and its communication model doesn't match.

[sitkack]

Once you learn Erlang and OTP, you will start seeing everything as a poor re-implementation of the same concepts.

[krainboltgreene]

The syntax you're looking for is k8S:Go::Erlang:OTP