Nomad was overly ambitious in running everything under the sun. Didn't catch on. Setting it up would also require Consul. Docker swarm is simpler and superior solution to Nomad and is built right into docker engine itself.
It was all quite a while (3-4 years) ago, so I don’t remember much details, except that Swarm was then not exactly capable of working in IPv6-only environments. It was significantly easier to navigate Docker’s codebase than Kubernetes’.
(Ultimately, my solution was that I understood that I didn’t need any kind of orchestration there, just HA/failover. But that’s another story.)
A quick search turned up this: https://www.greencentury.com/google-parent-alphabet-pledges-...
Looks like a possible case of greenwashing to me.
My experience with bare-metal Kubernetes hasn't been that bad. On my home cluster with very underpowered J4105 CPUs, I get about 5% CPU usage on the master node at idle, and 2% on workers.
I had high hopes back in my earlier days of them offering pluggable KV stores so folks could make tradeoffs if etcd doesn't align with their goals and risks but as best I can tell they've declared it a non-goal
That said this is a three node cluster running a handful of containers, with services accessed by my wife and I. So not exactly a large scale production experience.
You'd have to do a lots of custom morphing if you want that kind of interface over docker swarm.
For smaller setups, simplicity of docker swarm might be useful but I am curious to know from people who are running clusters of 25 to 50 nodes.
This is the voice of absolute delusion. Swarm is a mess. Nomad actually scales.
You will spend quite some time figuring the labels out, but once you have them for one service, it works for many.
A new solution that might be even better is Kamal by 37 Signals. It runs all their production stuff, so it must be capable. Can’t wait for a version 2 where, I’d suspect, by then there will be more community contributions for some more diverse setups merged in.