5-minute-production-app VS rancher

Author here.

This post doesn't live up to its title, I'm sorry about that.

The title should have been 'We are building a better Heroku FOR PRODUCTION APPS' (we'll add the 'for production apps' to the title)

It should have emphasized the _building_ part, we're just starting. The current 5 minute production app doesn't hold a candle to Heroku at the moment.

It should have made it clear the goals is to improve the speed with which you can configure a production app, not a development app. Development apps on Heroku are already close to perfect. The examples in this post are contrived since it talks about a development app, as rightly called out by Heroku people https://twitter.com/johnbeynon/status/1374306499426652161

It should have gone into why hyper clouds might be preferable https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/5-minute-production-app/deploy...

It should have talked about state, we made a small improvement in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/-/merge_request... but we should have done the planned work in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/-/issues/11137 and made one post out of it.

Disclaimer, I am a CNCF Ambassador (voluntary) - so it's in my interest to promote CNCF projects like Kubernetes.

It seems like a good time to mention my blog post from last year "Then he asked me “Is Kubernetes right for us?" -> https://alexellisuk.medium.com/then-he-asked-me-is-kubernete...

Some of the feedback I've had so far is that it was refreshing to get "permission" to consider alternatives vs. the current hype. I use K8s and K3s quite broadly myself, but increasingly see consulting prospects and customers who are not comfortable to make the leap, but are very happy on managed services with their chosen vendor - Azure / AWS / GCP.

GitLab recently released a bunch of terraform to show you how to run side projects in the free tier of a cloud - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/5-minute-production-app/deploy...

The OpenFaaS project again is very coupled to Kubernetes, making it easier to use and more reliable is important to the community and project's future. However, we created a version called faasd that works more like docker-compose. It's received much more traction than we expected and companies and individuals are putting it into production. It does't have clustering, and supports only 1 replica per function, so it's surprising.

I'll keep doing my bit to promote solutions that make K8s easier to understand like K3s (see also k3sup.dev) and to look into alternatives. But as you will see in my blog post - I don't think it's right to assume Kubernetes is the right solution for every team, and every project, without first talking about the problem being solved.

Less than five minutes. I worked closely with GitLab co-founders over the past 7 weeks, and we built the [Five Minute Production](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/5-minute-production-app/deploy-template/-/blob/master/README.md) project that generates AWS infra for webapps with minimal fuss.

Did something happen to the Apache 2 rancher? https://github.com/rancher/rancher/blob/v2.7.5/LICENSE RKE2 is similarly Apache 2: https://github.com/rancher/rke2/blob/v1.26.7%2Brke2r1/LICENS...

I follow the 4 ABCD steps bellow, but the first pod deployment never ends. What's wrong in it? Logs and result screens are at the end. Detailed configuration can be found here.

CVE-2023-22651 is rated 9.9/10 : https://github.com/rancher/rancher/security/advisories/GHSA-6m9f-pj6w-w87g

Depends. When I came into my last company I immediately noticed the lack of reproducible environments. Brought this up a few times and was met with some resistance because "we didn't have the capacity"... Until prod went down and it took us 23 hours to bring it back up due to spaghetti terraform.

For the latest releases of rancher: https://github.com/rancher/rancher/releases When is Rancher 2.7.1 going to be released? The Rancher support matrix for 2.7.1 shows k8s v1.24.6 as the highest supported version and Azure will drop AKS v1.24 in a few months... Should this be a concern for us? What could happen if we create our cluster with Rancher for an unsupported K8s version? 1.25 for example. - Rancher 2.7.2 just got released including support for 1.25. I have however tested running unsupported versions before, unless there is major deprecations in the kubernetes API it is fine in my experience. If we move to AKS imported clusters, in case we add node pools, and upgrade the cluster, will those changes be reflected in the Rancher Platform? - Yep! If we face some issues by running an unsupported K8s version on Rancher Launched K8s clusters, is it possible to remove it from Rancher, do the stuff we need, and then import it into the platform? - Yes, however be careful and do testing before doing in prod. From top of mind: Remove cluster from rancher (if imported), if rancher created you might want to revoke ranchers SA key for the cluster first (so it can't remove it). Delete the cattle-system namespace, and any other cattle-* namespaces you don't want to keep. And do your thing. It looks like AKS is faster than Rancher regarding supported Kubernetes versions... We would like to know if Rancher will always be on track with AKS regarding the removal of K8s version support and new versions. - In my experience yes. (Been using rancher on all three clouds for a 4 years now). What are exactly the big differences between imported AKS and Rancher-launched AKS? What should we look at, and what issues can we face when using one or another? - The main difference is that rancher will not be able to upgrade the cluster for you. You will have to do that yourself.

variable "rancher" { type = object({ namespace = string version = string branch = string chart_set = list(object({ name = string value = string })) }) default = { namespace = "cattle-system" # There is a bug with destroying the cloud credentials in version 2.6.9 until 2.7.1 and will be fixed in next release 2.7.2. # See https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/39300 version = "2.7.0" branch = "stable" chart_set = [ { name = "replicas" value = 3 }, { name = "ingress.ingressClassName" value = "nginx-external" }, { name = "ingress.tls.source" value = "rancher" }, # There is a bug with the uninstallation of Rancher due to missing priorityClassName of rancher-webhook # The priorityClassName need to be set # See https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/40935 { name = "priorityClassName" value = "system-node-critical" } ] } description = "Rancher Helm chart properties." }

When I searched DuckDuckGo instead, the 12th link actually had the real answer. It's in this issue on Rancher's GitHub. Turns out the Rancher admin needs to be in all of the Keycloak groups they want to have show up in the auto-populated picklist in Rancher. Being a Keycloak admin and even creating the groups isn't good enough. Frustratingly, the "caveat" note the Rancher guy is pointing to that says this is only present in the guide to setting up Keycloak for SAML, but apparently this is also true for OIDC.

Explicitly set TLS 1.3 in Rancher, though it could be a bug in Rancher: https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/35654

Thanks. Yeah looks like this might work: https://github.com/rancher/rancher/releases/tag/v2.7.2-rc3