It does and most people that used Nomad were very positive about it. But with the turn that Hashicorp have taken I'm not sure that it now stands much of a chance.
I love Nomad but having used it in two different roles and now invested time to understand k8s properly, I would absolutely not recommend it.
Nomad is simple on the surface and could have been a great tool - but it is basically unusable on its own without tighter integration with Hashi’s own tools (eg Vault). Configuring and maintaining all those things is nontrivial and ends up being more annoying (for a lesser end result) than just using a fully managed kubernetes cluster like GKE
You'd imagine that any scheduler that's well integrated with Vault would have a huge advantage over other ones. Surprising that it's not like that for another product from the same company.
Seconded. Hashicorp Nomad has been a breath of fresh air for doing HA deployments for my workloads. Getting a small cluster setup to self host Nomad is so easier than Kubernetes and defining workloads is much easier to understand too IMO.
The only negatives about Nomad is the Hashicorp license drama that has happened recently and persistent storage can be a pain in the ass.
They pulled the rug out on a lot of people and people tend to hold grudges. Community edition is peanuts compared to using an open source tool you _could have_ fixed your own bugs with by creating PRs or adding features with PRs. I used to be a huge hashicorp fanboy... _used to_.
Just to clarify, you can still access the code, submit PRs to add features, etc. The only difference is that during a fixed time period (4 years) you cannot use Nomad to compete with HashiCorp. If you want to do that, you can ask for a license.