Thank you for that clarification, so the advantage is in multi tenant systems at scale. What about single application, multiple backend services at scale? Wouldnt atomic + geard + consul + registrator be a better fit or is my lack of experience in developing for large applications causing me to miss something that kube will provide an advantage in some way. Kind Regards, Stephen Major From: Clayton Coleman Sent: 10/10/2014 10:50 AM To: Stephen Major Cc: Colin Walters; atomic-devel projectatomic io Subject: Re: [atomic-devel] [PATCH] geard -> Kubernetes
See the second FAQ question here - https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/master/README.md, I haven't yet carried this over to GearD yet but will soon.
Consul is central service discovery but not central trust chain - anyone node can declare a service (advantage) but any node can also be corrupted (disadvantage).
OpenShift is moving its focus to kube because we can do everything we could do in GearD + consul but we could run a multitenant system on it. The basic ideas of geard as an independent entity will live on in some form, but it's not a focus until we hit Openshift 3 beta 1.
|