[0xbadcafebee]

Kubernetes is literally more complicated than any other similar system in existence. It is so by definition, because it builds in more complexity than any other system has. But it also lacks the features you often need, so you have to learn even more to be able to get it to do what you want. You could write several books on running K8s in production.

[xtracto]

I was doing research to move set up some new system into scalable cloud infrastructure. My first option was K8s (EKS) and second was plain ECS+Fargate. Ramping up in K8s was so convoluted and painful that I decided to follow up with ECS. That has been quite straightforward.

[nitrogen]

My experiences with k8s have led me to never propose k8s in a new project. The k8s instances I have seen were bureaucratic and technical nightmares of unnecessary complexity. It doesn't provide a common ground for deployments because everyone will use and configure it differently.

[marcinzm]

>It doesn't provide a common ground for deployments because everyone will use and configure it differently.

Helm charts are used by 99% of the open source projects I've seen that run on top of Kubernetes. They are all written in a similar style so transferring settings between them is fairly easy. Helm will even create a barebones chart for you automatically in the common style.

[0xbadcafebee]

A helm chart is not a complete deployment system, it's just a wrapper around kubectl. Neither provides everything you need to completely manage deploys.

[zaat]

But you can't write books on running Linux in production, or Apache, or Windows, or Oracle, or... since the book shelves are (not literally but metaphorically) too crowded for yet another one on the subject