vcluster VS zap

Kubernetes? You mean the container orchestration system where they forgot to add Multi-tenancy? And no namespaces are not Multi-tenancy...

https://www.vcluster.com/

Whats the difference between this and vcluster (https://github.com/loft-sh/vcluster)?

Yep, as we see it they compliment each other quite well. DevPod takes your workspace to the cloud and DevSpace let's you develop against your Kubernetes cluster - potentially the same one you used to start your workspace.

Internally we use both in our development setup, spinning up remote workspaces using DevPod, installing DevSpace and kind into the devcontainer, then using DevSpace to develop against the cluster. See the vcluster setup[1] as an example

[1]https://github.com/loft-sh/vcluster/tree/main/.devcontainer

The tenants are internal dev teams so yeah maybe not. I was considering multi-tenanting different environments isolated at the kube layer with vCluster and have the vCluster pods running in Kata containers giving maximum isolation but still having a single management cluster. Ideally also avoiding the need to buy a second set of hardware for a dev environment

Vcluster

Looks interesting. How does this solution compare to vcluster?

sounds like the best option for you , is a tool called VCluster by loft ( https://www.vcluster.com/) , this way you can install as many k8s cluster as you want in the same k8s host cluster , those cluster share workers nodes and networking, but each has a separated "api server" , so it looks like you have a dedicated cluster with their own namespaces and tools . take a look at the docs to get a better understanding and how they work.

We're about to run a PoC with vcluster for isolated sandboxes, this might be relevant to you too

I think namespaces, RBAC and network policies are sufficient to partition users from the same organisation. I would investigate the use of vcluster ig you want to give your users even more isolation and capability (such as installing CRDs)

Depends on the use case. Namespaces provides soft isolation (so it means they share same Apiserver, PV's and global resources such as CRD's), but can be restricted with network policies. So it means, there's still potential in breaking other namespaces if you change PV's or CRD's which are used by other namespaces. Multi-Cluster solution can provide full isolation, but its also really expensive in resource consumption and maintenance/management effort. If namespaced-isolation isnt enough for your use case, you can consider vclusters (https://www.vcluster.com/)

The project currently uses slog package from standard library for logging. But switching to a more advanced logger like zap could offer more flexibility and features.

It's nice to have this in the standard library, but it doesn't solve any existing pain points around structured log metadata and contexts. We use zap [0] and store a zap logger on the request context which allows different parts of the request pipeline to log with things like tenantid, traceId, and correlationId automatically appended. But getting a logger off the context is annoying, leads to inconsistent logging practices, and creates a logger dependency throughout most of our Go code.

[0] https://github.com/uber-go/zap

Kubebuilder, like much of the k8s ecosystem, utilizes zap for logging. Out of the box, the Kubebuilder zap configuration outputs a timestamp for each log, which gets formatted using scientific notation. This makes it difficult for me to read the time of an event just by glancing at it. Personally, I prefer ISO 8601, so let's change it!

What else would you expect from a structured logging package?

To me it absolutely makes sense as the default and standard for 99% of applications, and the API isn't much unlike something like Zap[0] (a popular Go structured logger).

The attributes aren't an "arbitrary" concept, they're a completely normal concept for structured loggers. Groups are maybe less standard, but reasonable nevertheless.

I'm not sure if you're aware that this is specifically a structured logging package. There already is a "simple" logging package[1] in the sodlib, and has been for ages, and isn't particularly fast either to my knowledge. If you want really fast you take a library (which would also make sure to optimize allocations heavily).

[0]: https://pkg.go.dev/go.uber.org/zap

[1]: https://pkg.go.dev/log

And finally for structured logging: https://github.com/uber-go/zap

For logging: I recommend using Uber Zap https://github.com/uber-go/zap It will log stack backtraces and makes it super easy to debug errors when deployed. I typically log in the business logic and not below. And log at the entry for failures to start the system. Maybe not necessary for this example, but it’s an essential piece of any API backend.