phoenix-liveview-cluster
design
| phoenix-liveview-cluster | design | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |
| 46 | - | |
| - | - | |
| 0.0 | - | |
| about 3 years ago | - | |
| Elixir | ||
| GNU General Public License v3.0 only | - |
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.
phoenix-liveview-cluster
-
Docker Without Docker
I have been surprised how little good tooling there is for Elixir, and even full stack in general.
Clustering is supported, you can set libcluster to use our internal DNS to discover nodes: https://github.com/fly-apps/phoenix-liveview-cluster/blob/ma...
You also need some environment variables: https://github.com/fly-apps/phoenix-liveview-cluster/blob/ma...
And a dockerfile: https://github.com/fly-apps/phoenix-liveview-cluster/blob/ma...
We definitely need tutorials. We're hiring someone specifically to work on the entire Elixir dev UX, so hopefully we'll improve soon.
design
-
Docker Without Docker
> we'd have been fighting cni complexity to make it work.
Appreciate the candid responses, thanks for taking the time. That ipv6 wireguard peering post was really fascinating I read that too. Wireguard has been quite the a game-changer in it's space as well and a lot of value IMO is just in the simplicity and difficulty of misconfiguration, even though the performance is also fantastic.
Grateful that ya'll are sharing what you're doing right/finding interesting.
Since ya'll might appreciate this, I think there's an ultimate form of all these orchestrators out there that boils everything down to the "operator pattern" -- I call it "buhzaar" but I tried to get my thoughts out of the notebook a while ago[0]. It's almost like a completely normalized DB might be -- to strip an orchestrator down to it's bare minimum, which facilitates other processes that do resource provisioning and management. Then let people bring their own things that provision resources (and maybe you some "officially supported" ones but they all live separately and iterate separately).
I didn't quite put down all the thoughts I had but you think this is too much normalization (in the same way no one wants to do 7 joins)? You could argue that both nomad and k8s are denormalized (they intrinsically "know" how to provision/manage certain things) to a certain extent, and nomad just "bundles" less.
[0]: https://gitlab.com/buhzaar/design
-
Mariadb and ZFS
Please feel free too, would love to chat about this. I think we think extremely similarly -- What you're trying to build is almost exactly what I'm trying to build, except I plan on getting my leverage from k8s (and eventually my own thing that I'm working on called buhzaar which aims to be simpler than k8s).
What are some alternatives?
firecracker-containerd - firecracker-containerd enables containerd to manage containers as Firecracker microVMs
lxd - Powerful system container and virtual machine manager [Moved to: https://github.com/canonical/lxd]
rchab - Fly.io Remote Builder (Remote Controlled Hot Air Balloon)
simplenetes - The sns tool is used to manage the full life cycle of your Simplenetes clusters. It integrates with the Simplenetes Podcompiler project podc to compile pods.
linuxkit - A toolkit for building secure, portable and lean operating systems for containers
firebuild - Convenience of containers, security of virtual machines
firecracker-container
garden-shed - Volume management for linux garden backends