* Kubernetes is not written in Java
* There is no one size fit all, just like never ending Ruby vs JavaScript VS Java.
* Kubernetes just hit v1.0 not long ago.
* Seem like you already wrote the functionality you want, now what is the problem?
* There is no one size fit all, just like never ending Ruby vs JavaScript VS Java.
* Kubernetes just hit v1.0 not long ago.
* Seem like you already wrote the functionality you want, now what is the problem?
* Well, alright, but they market it as a general purpose project. I'm just saying that to us it's strange that none of these frameworks out there deal with persistent storage, as the author of the article also observed.
* Ok.
* Well the problem is that it'd be much nicer if we could just use Kubernetes. Obviously having a homegrown orchestrator is not very nice. There's bounds to be lots of edgecases that our ops will run into that'll continuously cause us to perform maintenance on it, and maintaining an orchestration framework is not our core business.
Anyway, this is not necessarily a critique of Kubernetes, it's great software. It's just an affirmation of the point the article is making, that it's curious that there's no interest in stateful containers from the maintainers of these frameworks.
We do care enormously about stateful solutions; I'll say what I've said elsewhere - how do you handle stateful services in your VMs?