> GCP offered the performance and consistency we needed. A second reason is that we believe Kubernetes is the future
Azure does a lot of cool stuff as well, not really a valid reason why you would move (other than you got a better deal).
Strange you work at Google and not know about him.
My previous manager was a Principle Engineer (Level 8). I am pretty sure no one here ever heard her name.
If that was remotely true then what product/service does Microsoft offer that is remotely comparable with Docker/Kubernetes and is neither Docker or Kubernetes?
Because you lead nothing if all you do is reuse the tools developed by the actual leaders. That's what followers do, not leaders.
Now, I happen to think Kubernetes is better, but you asked. Service Fabric was available to the public in 2016 but has been used internally since 2011.
I don't necessarily think you're wrong; I just think your argument, as stated, is weak.
I don't even do development in containers, but run services I'm not actively working on in them locally... this lets me have them nearly always on in the background and work on the piece I need to work on in the foreground. It's simply a matter of automation with a fast reset to zero.
The code that gets exercised the most is the code you can trust the most... by automating it once, you can repeat it. By automating with a container, you can isolate it. You can ensure the boundaries are proper, well defined and enough detail/documentation to repeat again and again. I do containerize the DB locally as well. I can reset and spin up the application stack I'm working on in under a minute total. Generally only resetting the db (around 18 seconds) or api (around 5) when those parts of the application are changed. I can work on the front end locally and just have the background in the background. I can tweak the background without touching shared environments. I can tear it all down and work on a different project without borking my host/local environment.
Yeah, orchestration setup and config in a cluster for hosting can be hard to learn (still learning current kubernetes myself) ... that doesn't mean that containers themselves are overkill.
It doesn't look like a good service to me at all.
When that GCLB outage happened, GKE would still be able to get traffic if you used ngnix ingress and/or regional load balancers.
"This Pingdom graph shows the number of errors we saw per day, first in Azure and then in GCP. The average for the pre-migration period was 8.2 errors per day, while post-migration it’s down to just one error a day."
This was measured independently by pingdom, not by gitlab.
Hello azure?
As a result it's often really hard to tell if all the differences are down to differences in quality between the two providers vs. things done as part of the migration.
But of course this also does not mean the providers aren't different in terms of quality, just that it takes more than a graph like that to tell.
Perhaps they haven't been doing enough chaosmonkey testing?
> Putting aside valid thing that article was written by person with role at gitlab 'Content Marketer'
A lot of us in marketing have technical backgrounds and are GitLab code contributors, that's what made us competitive for the positions we were hired for. We just write a lot of the blog posts so the product teams can focus on their own work. They're also usually very collaborative.
Sorry if you meant no offense, it's just a bit of a button-press issue for me!
What I wrote (and what I stand for) is that it is good to know that this article was written by 'content marketer' - meaning person with a SPECIFIC agenda for writing that article (by definition of 'content marketing' itself).
Thats always good to know. If anybody praises something I always prefer to know if there is something (e.g. salary?) which may created/influenced/PAID such opinion. We (hackernews) derided it on many ocassions. To give different example: I personally ask all bankers if they have commission on me (for specific recommended product), or not. And I consider it healthy to know and ask.
To make it clear, I think that there is a good content marketing, and that there is a a bad content marketing. The bad for example can be seen easily with searching google for "blog 10 best sleeeping bags" and similar.
While I don't take offense to your comment, I think you made it for a reason. It's an ad hominem fallacy. These are our staff engineer's words almost to the letter, if I had posted it in his name would you have taken it at face value? I think it's important for us to ask these questions of ourselves and analyze why we form certain opinions.
That said, I do appreciate the feedback, and thank you for your comments. I'll try to keep your opinions in mind with future posts as I certainly never want to come off as having an "agenda." We're not running some BuzzGitFeedLab mill here :) .
I thought Andrew gave a wonderful presentation, and yes, we do use Pingdom as a tool to measure these things.
If there's something we can do to help, please let me know!
Disclosure: I work at Azure on Machine Learning (but not AKS)
I also agree that they should share some cost analysis results.
They show that their latency has gone down, but that is not always the reason just because it correlates.
I would expect that most companies that both a) are big enough for the cloud providers to bother talking to and b) have proven they have the ability to run their workloads on multiple clouds are getting discounts from whatever cloud provider they end up using. One condition of these discounts might be that they can't publish exactly the prices they are getting, or any information that would let you infer the price.
I would expect all that to happen typically within 1 millisecond, and perhaps up to 100 milliseconds at the 99th percentile latency when the VM machine is overloaded/overheating/otherwise unhealthy.
So what design did Microsofts engineers pick that can ever take 10 minutes to do anything?
Maybe GitLab should focus more on their product instead of growth hacking.
Their product is pretty damn good as well, IMO.
To me gitlab already provides the absolute best CICD service. It's like they need work to provide a better service than any of their direct competitors.
I've heard great things about GitLab CI, but we aren't looking to move our version control and there doesn't seem to be a way to have hosted CI from GitLab without it.
Can I ask where you're hosting your code today? We offer first-class support for external repositories stored on GitHub with GitLab CI/CD for GitHub [1]. In addition, you can do similar CI/CD integration with any git repository by URL as well [2]. We see both of these as "minimal" integrations and we're hoping to add more first-class support for external repositories this yeah - but would love to know what you'd focus on first if you were Product Manager for a day :smile:
[1] https://about.gitlab.com/solutions/github/
[2] https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/ci_cd_for_external_repos/githu...