metallb VS helmfile

Hey guys, I want to share a guide I’m pretty proud of which is talking about setting up kubernetes which leverages https://kubespray.io/#/ and https://metallb.universe.tf/ so you can host this yourself most people when spinning up kubernetes opt for k3s or get stuck with all the options or unable to setup the external ips for their services so these tools will eliminate the problem.

Have a closer look at MetallLB.

To avoid that, you can use a combination of haproxy and keepalived, an enterprise grade load balancer like the one from F5 or Citrix. Besides that you can also work with https://kube-vip.io or https://metallb.universe.tf.

Not sure if klipper is usable in a cluster with multiple nodes, as it binds to one port only. You may want to use MetalLB instead: https://metallb.universe.tf/

Then deploy MetalLB https://metallb.universe.tf/

What issue do you see with the load balancer? For self hosted clusters, one can use MetalLB for example to have such single outfacing IP which will failover to another node keeping the same IP if a node dies.

Quoting from their docs:

metalLB to manage bare-metal LoadBalancer services - WIP - Only L2 configuration can be set-up via playbook.

What we’re going to install into the newly created AKS cluster is located in the helm directory. The descriptive Helmfile approach enables us to define applications and their settings in the helmfile.yaml file.

Is there any alternative to https://github.com/roboll/helmfile you are currently using in your company.

Interesting, I have approached this problem using Helmfile (https://github.com/roboll/helmfile) to define a “platform release package.”

To make managing the Helm deployments a little easier I used helmfile (https://github.com/roboll/helmfile).

But in general it's always easier to keep things quite separated. Meaning in separate helm releases. If you want to be able to manage things "together" at will, then you can use helmfile ( https://github.com/roboll/helmfile )

I agree; helm is too declarative.

Whenever I can, I use helmfile[0] for storing variables for helm since it does add a declarative layer on top of helm.

0 - https://github.com/roboll/helmfile

I went through the Helmfile repo Readme to figure out the difference between helmfile sync and helmfile apply. It seems like unlike the apply command, the sync command doesn't do a diff and helm upgrades the hell out of all releases 😃. But from the word sync, you'd expect the command to apply those releases that have been changed. There is also mention of the potential application of helmfile apply to periodically syncing of releases. Why not use helmfile sync for this purpose? Overall, the difference didn't become crystal clear, and I though there could probably be more to it. So, I'm asking.

helmfile is something i’ve used in the past for this https://github.com/roboll/helmfile

I always felt like dependencies in helm are for very simple non-coupled packages. I many times use Helmfile (https://github.com/roboll/helmfile) to manage dependencies instead of banging my head with vanilla Helm.

Once you do that, learn to create dynamic helm charts that use go templating and conditionals: https://github.com/roboll/helmfile