I think I'm just echoing rb808's comment, below, who is more informative than I can be, but I originally thought to comment only that my impression without any kubernetes experience is that the likelihood is, based upon my impressions of the article alone, is that in all probability this article is recording a attempt to coerce the inappropriate solution to deliver a much more difficult to achieve result than at least the scope of the article indicates is appreciated.
I could have just said that even knowing nothing much beyond cursory reading about kubernetes, the article comes across as a excercise in attaining disappointment thru hurried assumptions about what constitutes both a silver bullet and the daemon to be dispatched from unruliness.
The part that is disconcerting is the introduction to the article as a interview with the CTO, but it only takes a turn for the worse almost immediately by admitting to I'm production deployment of the solution, to which the subsequent admission to encountered difficulties is not compounding the sin do much as burying this entire excercise beneath condemnation, if I simply put down the impression conveyed. This has to be at the very least terrible PR. I'm increasingly concerned too, about the abundance of misapprehension of not only the capabilities of file systems but just fundamental design constraints, at s level of understanding that I would have expected to be fired for from a operations position in any of my customers. Have I missed the redeeming features in my haste to comment? It just feels so imbalanced and insecure to be so forthright about the level of accomplishment that's claimed.
I could have just said that even knowing nothing much beyond cursory reading about kubernetes, the article comes across as a excercise in attaining disappointment thru hurried assumptions about what constitutes both a silver bullet and the daemon to be dispatched from unruliness.
The part that is disconcerting is the introduction to the article as a interview with the CTO, but it only takes a turn for the worse almost immediately by admitting to I'm production deployment of the solution, to which the subsequent admission to encountered difficulties is not compounding the sin do much as burying this entire excercise beneath condemnation, if I simply put down the impression conveyed. This has to be at the very least terrible PR. I'm increasingly concerned too, about the abundance of misapprehension of not only the capabilities of file systems but just fundamental design constraints, at s level of understanding that I would have expected to be fired for from a operations position in any of my customers. Have I missed the redeeming features in my haste to comment? It just feels so imbalanced and insecure to be so forthright about the level of accomplishment that's claimed.