liftbridge VS Nomad

Liftbridge (https://liftbridge.io/) is more or less the NATS Kafka versioning.

[Gufo Liftbridge](https://pypi.org/project/gufo-liftbridge/) is the Python asyncio Liftbridge client.

https://liftbridge.io/

Apache Pulsar might be worth a look, but it's actually more complex under the hood than Kafka, but has a lot of features built-in that either aren't in FOSS Kafka yet, like tiered storage, or won't be until Confluent doesn't dominate the PMC (like an integrated schema registry), or just can't be done very nicely, if at all, like decent multi-tenancy.

That said, it's a fast moving target, the code quality last I looked was patchy in places, ditto the documentation for both it and Bookkeeper, and the admin overhead is higher (managing bookies and brokers and Zookeepers vs. just brokers and ZK with Kafka, or when KRaft is production ready, just brokers).

This is basically an ad for GCP right?

That said, it looks like Kafka is by far and away the way to handle persistent logs/events at scale. AFAIK a company here in Japan called LINE has all their messaging flowing through a large kafka cluster themselves.

Wonder if anyone is running large NATS Jetstream[0]/Liftbridge[1] or Pulsar[2] (yahoo runs those) clusters. I guess Pulsar might be #2 in terms of adoption at large scale?

[0]: https://docs.nats.io/jetstream/jetstream

[1]: https://liftbridge.io/

[2]: https://pulsar.apache.org/

Do you need the messages to be durable, if so you can have a look at Liftbridge: - https://liftbridge.io/ - https://github.com/liftbridge-io/liftbridge

And if you want closer kafka semantics built on top of nats, check out liftbridge:

https://liftbridge.io/

In previous post, we discussed creating a basic Nomad cluster in the Vultr cloud. Here, we will use the cluster created to deploy a load-balanced sample web app using the service discovery capability of Nomad and its native integration with the Traefik load balancer. The source code is available here for the reference.

Nomad is really awesome!

I only heard of this today, but it looks really interesting. It seems to finally get Kubernetes a bit closer to something like https://www.nomadproject.io/ in terms of complexity to install and operate.

In the rapidly evolving landscape of container orchestration and management, two prominent players have emerged: Kubernetes and HashiCorp's Nomad. While Kubernetes has gained widespread adoption and popularity, Nomad provides a compelling alternative that stands out for its simplicity and efficiency. In this blog post, we'll explore the advantages of using Nomad over Kubernetes and why it might be the right choice for certain use cases.

I can't discern how many are just those "dependabot" bumps but the 1400 forks show some are active https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/forks?include=active&page... including CircleCI who I would think have a stake in a libre Nomad https://github.com/circleci/nomad/tree/circleci/release-1.5....

Now maybe their goals don't align with the community, and/or they don't want to be in the maintainer business for such a project, but better than nothing

Could this be a solution? nomad

It worth noting that Nomad UI(a official web admin panel) has log tailing utility built-in so maybe partial work has already been done. The developers may have other concerns.

The related issue is https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/10220

While I do understand the reasoning in their FAQ on the subject (https://www.hashicorp.com/license-faq). I however failed to noticed those intentions in their license text (https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/commit/b3e30b1dfa185d9437...).

Specifically the part in FAQ which says "internal production use is fine", but then license says that "non-production use only" and then "You may make production use of the Licensed Work, provided such use does not include offering the Licensed Work to third parties on a hosted or embedded basis which is competitive with HashiCorp's products.".

IANAL, but even to me this statement is full loopholes. WHO do we consider 3rd party? WHAT do we consider "hosted or embedded basis"? WHEN do we consider it "competitive with Hashicorps products"?

My repeated tests show that when an allocation that is using a volume is deallocated, nomad doesn't release the volume. So, it is inaccessable to the next allocation.