Kubernetes vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes

Along with all the best features and support by k8s, the automatic container scheduling to worker nodes and also self-healing containers which is what I like the most. On the other side, when I was installing the k8s cluster on CentOS 8, it was quite difficult for me, but never mind it is working as we expected and it is a one-time effort. Especially, in my case, there are more than 7 application containers required to run and communicate with each other, so for us, Kubernetes is an optimal solution.

Incentivized

Well suited for - Large-scale Edge deployments of OpenShift instances. Policy-based consistency for all workloads is Less appropriate for - Small-scale deployments. Stand-alone deployments of K8s clusters. Deployments in the same data center.

• Complex cluster management can be done with simple commands with strong authentication and authorization schemes
• Exhaustive documentation and open community smoothens the learning process
• As a user a few concepts like pod, deployment and service are sufficient to go a long way

Incentivized

• Continuous deployment of other OpenShift instances.
• Controls clusters and applications from a single console.
• Built-in Security & compliance.

• Local development, Kubernetes does tend to be a bit complicated and unnecessary in environments where all development is done locally.
• The need for add-ons, Helm is almost required when running Kubernetes. This brings a whole new tool to manage and learn before a developer can really start to use Kubernetes effectively.
• Finicy configmap schemes. Kubernetes configmaps often have environment breaking hangups. The fail safes surrounding configmaps are sadly lacking.

Incentivized

• Initial deployment of the ACM itself needs to be made easy.
• Dependency on the Software versions of underlying open shift workloads during upgrades.
• LCM of ACM itself.

The Kubernetes is going to be highly likely renewed as the technologies that will be placed on top of it are long term as of planning. There shouldn't be any last minute changes in the adoption and I do not anticipate sudden change of the core underlying technology. It is just that the slow process of technology adoption that makes it hard to switch to something else.

It is an eminently usable platform. However, its popularity is overshadowed by its complexity. To properly leverage the capabilities and possibilities of Kubernetes as a platform, you need to have excellent understanding of your use case, even better understanding of whether you even need Kubernetes, and if yes - be ready to invest in good engineering support for the platform itself

Incentivized

As I said earlier also - - K8s manage the workloads better as compared to OpenStack in terms of reliability, observability & reachability. - K8s is not limited to only a single networking or storage solution as compared to OpenStack. - Networking (which is a key concept) is much simpler in K8s as compared to OpenStack. - It is possible to upgrade your applications without downtime in K8s but in OpenStack, you either have to divert the traffic or face an outage because you have to delete the whole stack & then recreate it.

Incentivized

I have also used TNA by Google Cloud, but that is not mature enough as ACM. Right now, ACM is the best choice as a cluster manager for private cloud data centers.

• Because of microservices, Kubernetes makes it easy to find the cost of each application easily.
• Like every new technology, initially, it took more resources to educate ourselves but over a period of time, I believe it's going to be worth it.

Incentivized

• Reduced the deployment duration of individual nodes by 50%.
• Acts as a central manager for all the clusters.
• Provides a lot of infrastructure options (storage, networking, etc) to build instances of your choice.