enhancements VS esbuild

Thanks for these links!

I picked out one at random just to check if my skeptical reaction is fair: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/...

- OK, this is actually a really good and useful doc!

- However, it's not an up-front design doc, it has clearly been written after the bulk of the work has been done, to explain and justify rolling out a big change. (See the "implementation history" timeline: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/...)

- It looks like the template wasn't very useful; most of the required sections are marked "N/A", and there are comments like The best test for work like this is, more or less, "did it work?"

> was always told early on that although they supported vault on kubernetes via a helm chart, they did not recommend using it on anything but EC2 instances (because of "security" which never really made sense their reasoning).

The reasoning is basically that there are some security and isolation guarantees you don't get in Kubernetes that you do get on bare metal or (to a somewhat lesser extent) in VMs.

In particular for Kubernetes, Vault wants to run as a non-root user and set the IPC_LOCK capability when it starts to prevent its memory from being swapped to disk. While in Docker you can directly enable this by adding capabilities when you launch the container, Kubernetes has an issue because of the way it handles non-root container users specified in a pod manifest, detailed in a (long-dormant) KEP: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/... (tl;dr: Kubernetes runs the container process as root, with the specified capabilities added, but then switches it to the non-root UID, which causes the explicitly-added capabilities to be dropped).

You can work around this by rebuilding the container and setting the capability directly on the binary, but the upstream build of the binary and the one in the container image don't come with that set (because the user should set it at runtime if running the container image directly, and the systemd unit sets it via systemd if running as a systemd service, so there's no need to do that except for working around Kubernetes' ambient-capability issue).

> It always surprised me how these conversations went. "Well we don't really recommend kubernetes so we won't support (feature)."

0 is not the request we've defined. And that makes sense. Memory QoS has been in alpha since Kubernetes 1.22 (August 2021) and according to the KEP data was still in alpha as of 1.27.

Note: There's actually a Structured Authentication Config established via KEP-3331. It's in v1.28 as a feature flag gated option and removes the limitation of only having one OIDC provider. I may look into doing an article on it, but for now I'll deal with the issue in a manner that should work even with a bit older versions versions of Kubernetes.

Kubernetes supports a skew policy of n+2 between API server and kubelet. This means if your CP and DP are both on 1.20, you could upgrade your control plane twice (1.20 -> 1.21 -> 1.22) before you need to upgrade your data plane. And when it comes time to upgrade your data plane you can jump from 1.20 to 1.22 to minimize update churn. In the future, this skew will be opened to n+3 https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/sig-architecture/3935-oldest-node-newest-control-plane

The KEP (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposal) is linked to in the PR [1]. From the summary:

> Sidecar containers are a new type of containers that start among the Init containers, run through the lifecycle of the Pod and don’t block pod termination. Kubelet makes a best effort to keep them alive and running while other containers are running.

[1] https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/...

This is where the new feature of mutable scheduling directives for jobs comes into play. This feature enables the updating of a job's scheduling directives before it begins. Essentially, it allows custom queue controllers to influence pod placement without needing to directly handle the assignment of pods to nodes themselves. To learn more about this check out the Kubernetes Enhancement Proposal 2926.

What your asking is a (vanilla) Kubernetes non-goal, others have mentioned fluxcd and other add ons that provide primitives for dependency aware deployments. The problem space is so large, that it's unreasonable to to address these concerns in Kubernetes itself, instead, make it extensible... Look at this KEP for example: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/753 Sidecar containers have existed, and been named as such since WAY before that KEP's inception, defining what these things should and shouldn't do is largely arbitrary. Aka: your use-case is niche, if you don't like the behavior, use flux or argo, or write something yourself.

If further interested, I may recommend checking out the KEP. I love how they document the decision making, and all these edge cases :).

At first we wanted to just get rid of all the helper utilities. Keep only the kernel, but this would mean a loss of backward compatibility. We needed some efficient code processing instead with recomposition and tree-shaking. We needed a bundler. But which one? Our testing approach relies on targets, not sources. We rebuilt the project frequently, speed was critical requirement. In essence, we chose a solution from a couple of among all available alternatives: esbuild and parcel. Esbuild won. Specifically in our case, it proved to be more productive and customizable.

During my search for deploying Lambdas via GitHub actions, I came across a tutorial that utilized ncc for converting TypeScript and bundling. While ncc is effective, I discovered esbuild, which proved to be significantly faster and perfectly suited to my requirements.

The advent of esbuild, the native support for ES Modules in browsers, the widespread adoption of import map, the emergence of tools like Native Federation, and the Nx ecosystem all combine to forge a flexible and well-maintained Micro Frontend Architecture.

EsBuild is a relatively new, blazing-fast JavaScript bundler and minifier. It stands out for its high performance, significantly speeding up the build process in development pipelines.

Unlike Webpack, the Vite DevServer only compiles files when they are requested. It leverages ES module imports, which allow JS files to import other files without needing to bundle them together during development. When one file changes, only that file needs to be re-compiled, and the rest can remain unchanged. Project files are compiled with Rollup.js. Third-party dependencies in node_modules are pre-compiled using the ultra-fast esbuild bundler for maximum speed, and they are cached until the dependency version changes. Vite also provides a client script for hot module reloading.

Use esbuild to build the React code into a form executable on both the server and client sides.

The functions will bundle using esbuild. For that, it is required to install esbuild globally:

TSX is the newest and most improved version of our ts-node, using ESBuild to transpile TS files to JS very quickly. The most interesting part is that TSX was developed to be a complete replacement for Node, so you can actually use TSX as a TypeScript REPL, if you install it globally with npm i -g tsx, just run tsx in your terminal and you can write TSX natively. But what's even cooler is that you can load TSX for all TypeScript files using --loader tsx when you run your file. For example, let's say we have this file called index.ts:

esbuild plus Vite is out of developer preview and enabled by default, yielding 67%, 87%, 80% speed improvements for build time, hybrid build time and hybrid serve time respectively.