Maybe people will finally realize they need to start rethinking infrastructure automation. I am.
Maybe people will finally realize they need to start rethinking infrastructure automation. I am.
This may be true for small, simple systems, such as basic web apps, that don’t really need Kubernetes. If your system can fit on a single machine, or even two or three, why would you use a cluster orchestrator to run it?
But if you’re at a real company - not a mom and pop shop or similar - and you have multiple services implemented by multiple teams, you’d be hard-pressed today to find something that makes more sense than Kubernetes. Yes, there are PaaS offerings that can hide some of the inherent complexity, but they tend to run into limits, cost issues, etc. quite quickly. Not to mention they’re often implemented on top of Kubernetes anyway.
Kubernetes is worth learning if you want to understand the needs and design of non-trivial software systems. Everything it offers corresponds to requirements such systems have, and it provides an extremely well organized, unified way of managing that. It’s one of the most well-designed software products of the 21st century.
Now they are moving to microservice fleet but will have so much devop overhead, so I'm building this platform that's basically a simple managed microservice + job service, not sure how many companies will be interested
There's a small but vocal subset of the HN audience who thinks "I can do all that with one hand tied behind my back," but they're not a scalable solution to actual business requirements.
I've worked at companies with 5 people (3 of them cofounders lol), with 30 people, with 100+ people, with 500 people, and with tens of thousands of people (global financial, healthcare, and telecoms corps.) Give me an example of these "mid size companies" that don't have a good technological solution available to them and I'll either tell you what they should be using, or why what they imagine they want doesn't exist.