Comment by simoncion
6 hours ago
> ...no remote management interface...
I bet colos will plug a KVM into your hardware and give you remote access to that KVM. I also bet rachelbythebay has at least one article that talks about the topic.
> ...can't scale if you suddenly had a surge of traffic.
1) If your public server serves entirely or nearly-entirely static data, you're going to saturate your network before you saturate the CPU resources on that laptop.
2) Even if it isn't, computers are way faster than folks give them credit for when you're not weighing them down with Kubernetes and/or running swarms of VMs. [0]
3) <https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/hotos15/hotos...> (2015)
[0] These are useful tools. But if you're going to be tossing a laptop in a colo (or buying a "tiny linode or [DO] droplet"), YAGNI.
>> ...no remote management interface...
> I bet colos will plug a KVM into your hardware and give you remote access to that KVM.
From the https://www.colaptop.com landing page: "Free KVM-over-IP access to your laptop - just like having it right next to you."
> From the https://www.colaptop.com landing page:
Yeah. I got bored a couple of hours after I posted that speculation and found several other colo facilities that mentioned that they'd do remote KVM. I'd figured that it was a common thing (a fair chunk of hardware you might want to colo either doesn't have IPMI or doesn't have IPMI that's worth a damn), but wasn't sure.
You really don't know how much it costs, do you?
Check https://tinypilotkvm.com/collections/all-products these are the cheapest ones.
I think a raspberry pi setup would be the cheapest? Not as professional perhaps.
MSRP for remote-capable KVMs is irrelevant.
You (the person paying to co-locate hardware) don't buy the KVM that the colo facility uses. The colo facility hooks up the KVM that they own to your hardware and configures it so that you can access it. Once you stop paying to colo your hardware, you take your hardware back (or maybe pay them to dispose of it, I guess) and they keep the KVM, because it's theirs.
k8s doesn't really weigh you down, especially if tuned for the low end use case (k1s). It encourages some dumb decisions that do, such as using Prometheus stack with default settings, but by itself it just eats a lot of ram.
Now using CPU limits in k8s with cgroups v1 does hurt performance. But doing that would hurt performance without k8s too.