firecracker-containerd
cluster-api
Our great sponsors
firecracker-containerd | cluster-api | |
---|---|---|
9 | 43 | |
2,048 | 3,354 | |
1.5% | 2.8% | |
4.3 | 9.9 | |
3 days ago | 3 days ago | |
Go | Go | |
Apache License 2.0 | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
firecracker-containerd
-
Savings cost for self managed K8s?
My team is working on multi-cloud AWS Bottlerocket remix (Azure, GCP) with opt-in support for [firecracker-containerd](https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd) for our in-house CNCF distro, investigating microkernels applicability (tldr; they are not production-ready). We test kubernetes compat and migration plans for over 40+ cherry-picked solutions, and facing numerous compat issues for every k8s update. We do have support for Container Managed Control Planes described above, as well.
-
Multi-tenancy in Kubernetes
You could use a container sandbox like gVisor, light virtual machines as containers (Kata containers, firecracker + containerd) or full virtual machines (virtlet as a CRI).
-
Firecracker internals: deep dive inside the technology powering AWS Lambda(2021)
There is this project, which I have never used, but seems promising. https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-container...
- Python 3.11 is out !
-
Deploying Firecracker VMs
, "should represent the path to a file that contains a JSON which stores the entire configuration for all of the microVM's resources" (okay this is fair enough). Also, they stipulate, "**The JSON must contain the configuration for the guest kernel and rootfs, as these are mandatory, but all of the other resources are optional, so it's your choice if you want to configure them or not. Because using this configuration method will also start the microVM, you need to specify all desired pre-boot configurable resources in that JSON.**" **File Names for the Pre-Boot Resources** (included within the greater repo here): 1. **firecracker.yaml** - Names of resources are contained here ; 'file nad the names of their fields are the same that are used in API requests' (cool) 2. **tests/framework/vm_config.json** (boilerplate config file to guide us - great) > *"After the machine is booted, you can still use the socket to send API requests for post-boot operations."* (this honestly feels clunky as a mf) ### Conclusion Somewhat of a pain in the ass (just looking through the directions); the fact that we'd have to go grab a uncompressed kernel image + file system image (ext4) is kind of a fucking hassle / burden. Was hoping for a solution more akin to Docker where it can just be spun up real quick & then deployed. But they claim that this 'jailer' feature (that they keep hyping) will **ensure** (I guess?) that whatever is done within the container will remain within the container (and not escape). I haven't seen anything that sticks out about this project that leads me to believe that it possesses that capability, but I definitely don't want to rule it out. ### Extra Documentation + Information 1. **OSv Running on 'Firecracker'** (yay more work though) - http://blog.osv.io/blog/2019/04/19/making-OSv-run-on-firecraker/ 2. **Building OSv Images Using Docker** - http://blog.osv.io/blog/2015/04/27/docker/ 3. **firecracker containerd** (this is something that's probably important for the overall mission of what we want to accomplish here) - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd ### Firecracker Containerd **Description** - "*firecracker-containerd enables containerd to manage containers as Firecracker microVMs*" - "This repository enables the use of a container runtime, containerd, to manage Firecracker microVMs. Like traditional containers, Firecracker microVMs offer fast start-up and shut-down and minimal overhead. Unlike traditional containers, however, they can provide an additional layer of isolation via the KVM hypervisor." **They Also Identify Potential Use-Cases in the Repo Such as** 1. "*Sandbox a partially or fully untrusted third party container in its own microVM. This would reduce the likelihood of leaking secrets via the third party container, for example.*" 2. "*Bin-pack disparate container workloads on the same host, while maintaining a high level of isolation between containers. Because the overhead of Firecracker is low, the achievable container density per host should be comparable to running containers using kernel-based container runtimes, without the isolation compromise of such solutions. Multi-tenant hosts would particularly benefit from this use case.*" Really interesting feature of this repo here is: "*A root file filesystem image builder that constructs a firecracker microVM root filesystem containing runc and the firecracker-containerd agent.*" (that could save a lot of time on that whole filesystem image thing that they were mentioning prior) **Additional Links of Importance** 1. **Getting Started Guide** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd/blob/main/docs/getting-started.md 2. **Quickstart Guide** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd/blob/main/docs/quickstart.md 3. **A Root Filesystem Image Builder** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd/blob/main/tools/image-builder 4. **Runtime Linking Containerd** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd/blob/main/runtime **Documentation All Located Here** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd/tree/main/docs (definitely fucking needed because there's a lot here to wrap one's head around) - **Design Approaches Doc** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd/blob/main/docs/design-approaches.md - **Shim Architecture** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-containerd/blob/main/docs/shim-design.md - **Launching 4k VMs Using Firecracker** - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-demo - **firectl** (CLI options for manipulating this tool from terminal ; this is important as well) - https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firectl [damn, there's a lot that came with this here!]
-
Is Fargate just a part of ECS?
Exactly, it is about secure multi-tennancy. If I recall correctly firecracker doesn't replace containerd, microVMs still runs some sort of it. Anyway, you still need a base OS because container doesn't have the whole OS image. Also I think you can have multiple containers in a single Fargate task so they have to be isolated too.
-
Firecracker MicroVMs
How does that compare to firecracker-containerd?
https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-container...
This repository enables the use of a container runtime, containerd, to manage Firecracker microVMs. Like traditional containers, Firecracker microVMs offer fast start-up and shut-down and minimal overhead. Unlike traditional containers, however, they can provide an additional layer of isolation via the KVM hypervisor.
-
Docker Without Docker
I'm really impressed by fly.io, and the candidness with which they share some of their really awesome technology. Being container-first is the next step for PaaS IMO and they are ahead of the pack.
I aim to build a platform like theirs someday (probably not any time soon) but I don't think I'd do any of what they're doing -- it feels unnecessary. Bear with me as I recently learned that they use nomad[0] and some of these suggestions are kubernetes projects but I'd love to hear why the following technologies were decided against (if they were):
- kata-containers[1] (it does the whole container -> VM flow for you, automatically, nemu, firecracker) with multiple VMM options[2]
- linuxkit[3] (let's say you didn't go with kata-containers, this is another container->VM path)
- firecracker-containerd[4] (very minimal keep-your-container-but-run-it-as-a-VM)
- kubevirt[5] (if you just want to actually run VMs, regardless of how you built them)
- Ceph[6] for storage -- make LVM pools and just give them to Ceph, you'll get blocks, distributed filesystems (CephFS), and object gateways (S3/Swift) out of it (in the k8s space Rook manages this)
As an aside to all this, there's also LXD, which supports running "system" (user namespace isolated) containers, VMs (somewhat recent[7][8]), live migration via criu[9], management/migration of underlying filesystems, runs on LVM or zfs[10], it's basically all-in-one, but does fall behind in terms of ecosystem since everyone else is aboard the "cloud native"/"works-with-kubernetes" train.
I've basically how I plan to run a service like fly.io if I ever did -- so maybe my secret is out, but I sure would like to know just how much of this fly.io got built on (if any of it), and/or what was turned down.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26745514
[1]: https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers
[2]: https://github.com/kata-containers/kata-containers/blob/2fc7...
[3]: https://github.com/linuxkit/linuxkit
[4]: https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-container...
[5]: https://github.com/kubevirt/kubevirt
[6]: https://docs.ceph.com/
[7]: https://discuss.linuxcontainers.org/t/running-virtual-machin...
[8]: https://github.com/lxc/lxd/issues/6205
[9]: https://criu.org/Main_Page
[10]: https://linuxcontainers.org/lxd/docs/master/storage
-
I discovered FaaS and what it changed for me
https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/firecracker-container...
cluster-api
-
5-Step Approach: Projectsveltos for Kubernetes add-on deployment and management on RKE2
In this blog post, we will demonstrate how easy and fast it is to deploy Sveltos on an RKE2 cluster with the help of ArgoCD, register two RKE2 Cluster API (CAPI) clusters and create a ClusterProfile to deploy Prometheus and Grafana Helm charts down the managed CAPI clusters.
-
“Ansible for DevOps” eBook by Jeff Geerling Is Now Free
4. Having moved to a container orchestrator, all of my nodes are immutable. Hardware and VM instances _can_ be born magically into existence. Nearly all infra providers support [cluster-api](https://cluster-api.sigs.k8s.io/). Network infrastructure can now be managed with TF, so I go that route.
- PR to docs are welcome.
-
Cluster API Theoretical and Hands-On Breakdown
## Linux curl -L https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api/releases/download/v1.4.4/clusterctl-linux-amd64 -o clusterctl sudo install -o root -g root -m 0755 clusterctl /usr/local/bin/clusterctl ## Mac brew install clusterctl
-
Thank you and good bye
Did you ever try CAPI? https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api
-
Is it possible to install Rancher to manage an already functioning K8S?
You might find interesting the capi-rancher-import k8s operator we use in Sylva, it would adopt in Rancher server the Cluster API created k8s clusters (with bootstrap provider kubeadm or even rke2 - you can lookup CAPBR for the latter). I understand your clusters are not created by Cluster API, so if you could move the workloads/resources to new clusters created by Cluster API, this can come handy. (Adoption of non-CAPI clusters into CAPI is not yet a standard practice, more in https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api/issues/7776)
-
What tool suggestions do you have for someone who's gonna set up an on-premise k8 cluster? Which tools do you use?
Most of the comments have mentioned older tools like kubespray, Ansible, Rancher etc. I would suggest the cloud native way using ClusterAPI or use a tool that relies on ClusterAPI in the backend called Talos
-
Multi-tenancy in Kubernetes
Cluster API
-
Scaling Event-Driven Applications Made Easy with Sveltos Cross-Cluster Configuration
Sveltos is a powerful open source project that makes managing Kubernetes add-ons a breeze. It automatically discovers ClusterAPI powered clusters and allows you to easily register any other cluster (like GKE). Then, it seamlessly manages Kubernetes add-ons across all your clusters.
- Schulungen für den Berufseinstieg nach dem Bachelor
What are some alternatives?
kata-containers - Kata Containers is an open source project and community working to build a standard implementation of lightweight Virtual Machines (VMs) that feel and perform like containers, but provide the workload isolation and security advantages of VMs. https://katacontainers.io/
rancher - Complete container management platform
kubevirt - Kubernetes Virtualization API and runtime in order to define and manage virtual machines.
kops - Kubernetes Operations (kOps) - Production Grade k8s Installation, Upgrades and Management
lxd - Powerful system container and virtual machine manager [Moved to: https://github.com/canonical/lxd]
karmada - Open, Multi-Cloud, Multi-Cluster Kubernetes Orchestration
buildbuddy - BuildBuddy is an open source Bazel build event viewer, result store, remote cache, and remote build execution platform.
terraform-k8s - Terraform Cloud Operator for Kubernetes
garden-shed - Volume management for linux garden backends
kcp - Kubernetes-like control planes for form-factors and use-cases beyond Kubernetes and container workloads.
phoenix-liveview-cluster - LiveView in a global cluster.
eksctl - The official CLI for Amazon EKS