Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> A PDB is a good example of Kubernetes's complexity escalation. It's a problem that arises when you have dynamic, controller-driven scheduling. If you don't need that you don't need PDBs. Most situations don't need that.

No, and that's my point: PDBs exist always. Whether your org has a term for it, or whether you're aware of them is an entirely different matter.

We I did work comprised of services running on VMs, there is still a (now, spritual) PDB associated with that service. I cannot just take out nodes willy-nilly, or I will be the cause of the next production outage.

In practice, I was just intimately familiar with the entire architecture, out of necessity, and so I knew what actions I could and could not take. But it was not unheard of for a less-cautions or less-skilled individual to do before thinking. And it inhibits automation: automation needed to be aware of the PDB, and honestly we'd probably just hard-code the needs on a per-service basis. PDBs, as k8s structures them, solves the problem far more generically.



> we'd probably just hard-code the needs on a per-service basis.

For 99% of situations this is a better decision. For, idk, at least 20% of the remaining 1%, PDBs won't handle it anyway.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: