FrederikNJS

joined 2 years ago
[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

My team is constantly looking for new technologies to make sure we're not turning ourselves into dinosaurs. We all know that Kubernetes won't last forever, something better will come along some day.

That being said I don't really see the full value of Triton or Xen with unikernels... They might have a bit less performance overhead if used correctly, but then again Kubernetes on bare metal also has very little overhead.

Kubernetes is certainly comes with a learning curve, and you need to know how to manage it, but once you have Kubernetes there's a ton of nifty benefits that appear due to the thriving community.

Need to autoscale based on some kind of queue? Just install the Keda helm chart

Running in the cloud and want the cluster to autoscale the nodes? Just install cluster-autoscaler helm chart

Want to pick up all of your logs and ship them somewhere? Just install the promtail helm chart

Need a deployment tool? Just install the ArgoCD helm chart

Need your secrets injected from some secret management solution? Just install the external-secrets helm chart

Need to vulnerability scan all the images you are using in your cluster? Just install the trivy-operator helm chart

Need a full monitoring stack? Just install the kube-prometheus-stack helm chart

Need a logging solution? Just install the loki helm chart

Need certificates? Just install the cert-manager helm chart

The true benefit of Kubernetes isn't Kubernetes itself, but all the it's and pieces the community has made to add value to Kubernetes.

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Apology accepted, and thank you for not name calling.

And yeah, if you can save the ops team salaries by picking Heroku, then it certainly might offset the costs.

When you talk about Triton, do you mean this? Because funnily enough one of their bigger features seems to be that you can run Kubernetes on top of it. It looks pretty cool though, but I must say it was quite hard to find proper info on it.

Triton also seem to push for containerization quite heavily, and especially Docker... So when you talk about Triton are you suggesting to use the Infrastructure Containers or Virtual Machines instead?

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at... Are you implying that I'm autistic because I only have 10 pods in a Kubernetes cluster?

Presently our clusters run roughly 1400 pods, and at this scale there certainly are benefits to using something like Kubernetes.

If your project is small enough to make sense on Heroku, then that's awesome, but at some point Heroku stops making sense... both for managing at scale, and costs. Heroku already seems to be 2-4x as expensive as AWS on-demand. Presently we're investigating moving out of AWS and into a datacenter, as it seems that we can reduce our costs by at least an order of magnitude.

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (7 children)

The right tool for the right job.

I agree that many small businesses jump to Kube too early. If your entire app is a monolith and maybe a few supplementary services, then Kube is massive overkill.

But many people also tend to overlook all of the other benefits that suddenly become very easy to add when you already have Kube, such as a common way to collect logs and metrics, injecting instrumentation, autoscaling, automated certificate handling, automated DNS management, encrypting internal network traffic, deployment tools that practically works out of the box, and of course immutable declarative deployments.

Of course you can build all of this yourself, when you need it, but once you have the foundation up and running, it becomes quite easy to just add a helm chart and suddenly have a new capability.

In my opinion, when the company it big enough to need a dedicated ops team, then it's big enough to benefit from Kube.

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago (9 children)

On slow terminals k9s can be rather sluggish when scrolling through the lists

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 13 points 6 months ago

The depth perception also makes quite a difference. The side of your face can clearly be seen in a mirror to be the side of your face, but depending on lighting, the side of your face can look as if it's part of the front of your face in a picture as you don't have the depth perception. The result is that photos make you look fatter than your mirror image would.

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 15 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Nope, but I trust the ones that lack the hardware for dialing home.

But generally I don't buy devices unless I have reason to trust them.

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 21 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

As the other poster said, both Zigbee and Zwave devices do not talk to the Internet. They can't even connect to your Wi-Fi anyway. They need to connect to a device that acts as a router but specifically for Zigbee or Zwave, usually called a Hub or Coordinator.

There's many different hubs around. Many commercial ones do indeed connect directly to the WiFi and therefore internet. But nothing is stopping you from buying a USB Dongle Hub with open source firmware and plugging it into a Raspberry Pi, if you want to eliminate the potential spying.

The Zigbee and Zwave networks inherently cannot communicate with the Internet. So the only risk of spying is if you installed something in the Raspberry that spies on you.

Both Philips Hue and IKEA Trådfri and many other vendors simply use Zigbee, which means you can bring your own Hub and completely eliminate the risk of spying.

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 2 points 6 months ago

Yeah... 1212 hours in Factorio, and I only just started Space Age

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

You are correct, and I use it myself, right up until you aren't on the same local network...

I actually haven't tested whether it works if you make a mobile hotspot... But being out in a bar that doesn't offer WiFi, would then require you to first set up a mobile hotspot, get the other person to connect, then download localsend before you can actually transfer the file. And even if the bar offered WiFi, you would kinda hope that the bar has enabled client isolation on the network to avoid spreading malware... But that would in turn defeat Localsend.

With Airdrop you don't need any of that, given that both people have iDevices

[–] FrederikNJS@lemm.ee 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't own an Apple device, but the few time I have interacted with Airdrop it has basically been:

  • Press button to share something with Airdrop
  • Select the device to send to
  • target device receives notification to accept.
  • Press accept
  • Done

And this has just worked regardless of which combination of Apple devices I had available at the time.

In the ideal case this is just as simple for Androids. But I have tried many different combinations of the technologies that was mentioned above and different types of devices, different brands. And sometimes it just works. But way too often I see a failure for the devices to discover eachother, or once discovered the file failed to transfer, with no obvious explanation of why.

view more: ‹ prev next ›