Hey! I'm building SprintPulse - https://sprintpulse.io - a real-time retrospective tool designed with small teams in mind that transforms team feedback into concrete action items. With AI-powered summaries, merge suggestions, and sentiment tracking, every voice is heard and nothing gets lost.
I’m probably not going to try it because while it sounds interesting it seems expensive for me considering that there are free tools already available. How does this compare to Rancher for example?
Thanks for the comment! It's more of an alternative to Lens/K9s than it is to Rancher. You get to see and manage the resources from all your clusters in one view without having to install anything on the clusters.
If its similar to k9s and lens what sets it apart? Please don’t get upset from my questions, it’s not my intention. I am genuinely just wondering why I would pay for this tool when there are similar tools that are free to use. I actually tried your tool not long ago - I remembered now from the screenshot. At the time it didn’t support proxies if I remember correctly and I didn’t really see anything that would make me switch from k9s (my current favorite because I’m very fast using it with the keyboard). Perhaps I will try it again to see what’s changed.
Not upset at all, I totally understand where you're coming from :)
The biggest difference between k9s and Aptakube is the multi-cluster connectivity and a more user-friendly resource view that is not YAML/Describe.
Socks/HTTP proxies are supported now! And keyboard navigation got better in 1.4 thanks to the command palette, but there's a lot more to do to make it super keyboard friendly (coming soon!)
What I've learned after building multiple products (in different crowded niches) is that everyone has their preferences. I have a lot of customers who migrated from K9s/Lens because they preferred Aptakube. You just have to find what works for you, which in your case might be k9s :)
`The multi-cluster connectivity and a more intuitive resource interface` may not appear to offer significant advantages. These features may not provide sufficient incentive for users to switch from K9 from example which is highly documented, available resources over the internet and so on.
The features your are targeting does not seem why I would switch. I think it needs more reason why there is yet another tool on it. Just wanted to give my feedback, no intention to downplay it.
That's why I think it may be a problem on Macs, because I don't see the same issue on Linux either. I am not familiar with Wireshark. What should I be looking for? I tried but there's a lot of information for each packet.
Filter by "ip.addr == 1.1.1.1" and look at the "Time" column. With UDP you'll see 2 datagrams - request and response. TCP you'll see a SYN,SYNACK,ACK handshake and then 2 segments. TLS you'll see a longer handshake and then (encrypted) request and response (2 segments).
Wow now I am even more confused. The Time column shows 3.67 for UDP and 7.32 for TCP. This seems to suggest that UDP is faster, but dig commands show the opposite. Why is that?
drill vs dig comparison was not form mac, but I expect them behave similarly on different platforms. drill is a dig-like utility from NLnet Labs, on Mac can be installed as part of ldns library e. g. using 'brew install ldns'
It's up to you. You can configure it with one master or HA multiple masters (e.g.). If you set the instance count for the masters pool >1 then my tool will create a load balancer in front of the API server.
The tool simply requires a small YAML config file and creates and configures everything that you need to get a fully functional cluster in a few minutes. It creates all the infrastructure resources (servers etc), it deploys kubernetes on all the nodes, and then installs some software that allows you to provision both load balancers and persistent volumes. It also installs a controller that makes upgrading to a new version easier.
What the tool does not install is other apps, because this would be too opinionated and depends from cluster to cluster.
k3s because it has been around for a while, and it's something I have used almost since it was first made available.
Yes cluster upgrades are covered with the "upgrade" command, as described in the REAME. I use the Rancher's System Upgrade Controller for this, which makes rolling upgrades very easy and super quick.
Github Actions is perfectly fine, it's what I use both for personal stuff and at
work.
For the database, are you planning to host it in Kubernetes? Depending on the database type there may be an operator that can handle backups easily for you. For example for Postgres I have used the Zalando operator which does this and there is a newer one called CloudNativePG which might be even better. What kind of databases are they?
reply