| It really is interesting. What was shown was the ability of systemd to have restart policies of units and the ability to load secret over some sort of Unix socket primitive. Plus, it does not even try to do topological sorts, it restarts everytime and accepts that its preconditions are false. And basically as it can do that for any more or less untyped pile of resource, it is "flexible".
Sure, void* + a tag is flexible. K8s is tiring.
Reconciliation is not exclusive to K8s, it's not the best system we have, not even close. It is a particularly popular system with very specific choices, which has a nice property of assuming that state drifts therefore reconciliation is a must. The annoying part is that: to show everyone else that K8s is complex, it is necessary to build a reconciliation based piece of software that compose well with the rest of the world and prove that you don't need K8s to achieve the same features that most people use, except if you are $bigcorp.
Alas, people have finite time and I do think it is quite clear how to build this using more fundamental pieces such as systemd and more. Making this kind of article even more frustrating because I get the good intent of convincing people that K8s is not frightening and complicated.
I really feel there is a lack of theory and research definitions in this area of computer science. Rigor is missing. |
What I was told is that it doesn't scale and k8's is simpler because how does it talk to the database otherwise? Oddly enough, I'm not sure this person has ever _just_ worked with containers without k8's and so it all falls into a black box.
Which is odd, but all of this is to take roughly 100 servers and get them into the cloud.
At some point I have to wonder if it's even possible for many of these same people to work in a way that's simple.