Went to nomad, which is working better for my workloads.
There's still use-cases where k8s wins; but nomad handles state a bit better and is easier to reason about from scratch.
There's still use-cases where k8s wins; but nomad handles state a bit better and is easier to reason about from scratch.
1) I don't really want to manage the installation but there aren't any(?) cloud hosts for nomad that I can see. 2) It doesn't seem as widely used so community support seems thin. There aren't many blog posts about good patterns with it etc, and I'd worry that we'd get stuck and end up reverting back to k8s.
Point 2 is debatable. Lots of people nowadays put Kubernetes on their resume but that doesn't mean they are great architects or technicians, yet a good part of running production on Kubernetes is doing it right.
You'll see much fewer people with Nomad on their resume, but on the other hand you know they're not here for the buzz, they're usually more experienced and know what they're talking about.
We wrote about our decision to switch here: https://www.koyeb.com/blog/the-koyeb-serverless-engine-from-...
Nomad, Consul and Vault interoperate extremely well and are mostly pleasant to use, but I found myself missing the rest of the ecosystem pretty quickly, especially around ingresses, and I think they made the wrong decision on the networking model compared to Kubernetes.
That said, I haven't played with Consul Connect, the Consul+Envoy service mesh, yet. That might address a lot of the problems. But fundamentally I can't help but think that Nomad and Kubernetes both made a run of it and Kubernetes came out the winner of mindshare and ecosystem.
Can you elaborate on how Nomad handles state differently than K8S and what makes it better?