Skip to main content

analysis of a train wreck

I was reading an article about a DEVOPS train wreck. The author seemed to be critical of DEVOPS, Openstack, Kubernetes, and the Agile process. Frankly he was throwing around so glossary tems that his point seemed lost in the aggregate.

And as I kept digging for the conclusion, I heard it. It's the phrasing that you hear in any Shark Tank episode.
"We’re staking our future on solving this problem, and others are as well. If more smart people get busy solving this problem, we will all benefit by getting our industry into shape for the new-new way of writing and running software." -Sumeet Singh
That's when I realized it was marketing. The article is broken into what amounts to an executive whitepaper.

  • the problem statement with a hint of a solution
  • supporting bullets that reinforce the problem statement
  • a polished summary that basically restates the problem and then offers a vague solution
Now if you were writing to the CEO of a company with a complaint it might look something like:
  • problem statement
  • 3 bullet points explaining the problem
  • and what your expectation is for corrective action
I happen to know this works because [a] I got it directly from a CEO and Harvard grad [b] I've used it with great success at Apple and The Disney Company.

Frankly the author of the article I'm criticizing missed the mark. Kubernetes and OpenStack are new technologies and have poor tooling. They offer little if any visibility to the outside world such as traditional operators and managers. Right now executives seem to think that these technologies are free and they are not. [a] you're blind to your operational risks [b] you have no idea what the costs are going to be when things to are production ready.

Anyway, If I was in a position to make this kind of purchase on this tech. I'm spending my money on CoreOS and Tectonic. I do not need VMs to host containers.

Popular posts from this blog

Prometheus vs Bosun

In conclusion... while Bosun(B) is still not the ideal monitoring system neither is Prometheus(P).


I am running Bosun in a Docker container hosted on CoreOS. Fleet service/unit files keep it running. However in once case I have experienced at least one severe crash as a result of a disk full condition. That it is implemented as part golang, java and python is an annoyance. The MIT license is about the only good thing.

I am trying to integrate Prometheus into my pipeline but losing steam fast. The Prometheus design seems to desire that you integrate your own cache inside your application and then allow the server to scrape the data, however, if the interval between scrapes is shorter than the longest transient session of your application then you need a gateway. A place to shuttle your data that will be a little more persistent.

(1) storing the data in my application might get me started more quickly
(2) getting the server to pull the data might be more secure
(3) using a push g…

Entry level cost for CoreOS+Tectonic

CoreOS and Tectonic start their pricing at 10 servers. Managed CoreOS starts at $1000 per month for those first 10 servers and Tectonic is $5000 for the same 10 servers. Annualized that is $85K or at least one employee depending on your market. As a single employee company I'd rather hire the employee. Specially since I only have 3 servers.

The pricing is biased toward the largest servers with the largest capacities; my dual core 32GB i5 IntelNuc can never be mistaken for a 96-CPU dual or quad core DELL

If CoreOS does not figure out a different barrier of entry they are going to follow the Borland path to obscurity.

Weave vs Flannel

While Weave and Flannel have some features in common weave includes DNS for service discovery and a wrapper process for capturing that info. In order to get some parity you'd need to add a DNS service like SkyDNS and then write your own script to weave the two together.
In Weave your fleet file might have some of this:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=/opt/bin/weave run --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
In sky + flannel it might look like:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=docker run -d --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStartPre=etcdctl set /skydns/local/ncx/bob '{"host":"`docker inspect --format '{{ .NetworkSettings.IPAddress }}' bob`","port":8080}' ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
I'd like it to look like this:
[Service] . . . ExecStartPre=skyrun --net=host --name bob ncx/bob ExecStart=/usr/bin/docker attach bob
That's the intent anyway. I'm not sure the exact commands will work and that's partly why we…