TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Torus development has been stopped at CoreOS

124 pointsby Perceptesabout 8 years ago

16 comments

chuhnkabout 8 years ago
&quot;But we didn&#x27;t achieve the development velocity over the 8 months that we had hoped for when we started out, and as such we didn&#x27;t achieve the depth of community engagement we had hoped for either.&quot;<p>Open source is tough, even as a successful VC funded company. Gotta give credit to CoreOS though, rather than beating a dead horse they&#x27;re acknowledging there&#x27;s little external interest and their time would be better spent focused elsewhere. Seeing as they&#x27;ve discontinued Fleet as well it&#x27;s likely they&#x27;re doubling down on the commercial Tectonic product built on kubernetes. There&#x27;s also likely pressure from their investors to start making money, especially as they&#x27;re well into using their series B and might want to look to raise more money.<p>Distributed file storage is a tough market in itself. Developers get excited about technology but how many need this as opposed to a highly available database? I love the building blocks of distributed systems and understand that Google&#x27;s technology is built on a layering of tech (Colossus, Spanner, etc) but it seems the world is not yet ready. Everyone is already struggling to understand the complexities of this new ecosystem and how the pieces all fit together.<p>Again, good move by CoreOS, wish them luck with their commercial strategy.
评论 #13679939 未加载
评论 #13680588 未加载
评论 #13679805 未加载
评论 #13679923 未加载
joshbaptisteabout 8 years ago
Bcantrill on how hard such a feat would be to accomplish.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11817387" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11817387</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11818081" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11818081</a>
评论 #13680606 未加载
KaiserProabout 8 years ago
I have karma to burn on this, so here goes:<p>I worked for several years in VFX&#x2F;HPC. 30k+ cpus and 15pbs of storage.<p>Firstly with storage its very rare that people want actual block storage (unless you are hosting VMs, but thats so 2007.....) Yes, I know, openstack, but that&#x27;s just fucking horrific, seriously just use netboot and be done with it. I&#x27;ve seen people do it inside new clustereing systems, but its really not fun to do, especially if you consumer is prone to disappearing without warning. (FSCK is a terrible mechanism for fast recovery)<p>Most apps, unless they have bought into the &quot;shove everything over HTTP and pay the penalty&quot;, want a posix file system to store anything of importance. (yes, yes database, but where is that writing the data to?)<p>Now, there are three ways you can do this:<p>o use a clustered file system<p>o Use NFS (with or without a clustered filesystem underneath)<p>o Fuck about with iscsi&#x2F;SAS&#x2F;FC and dynamically map block dynamically.<p>Using a clustered filesystem spread over many clients is begging for trouble, mainly because one client can fuck it up for everyone. Some FSs are dynamic and sexy, but they have a habit of fucking up in new and interesting ways that even the authors can&#x27;t figure out.<p>The common ground is having storage nodes attached directly to a pack of big fat disks(for streaming IO) or NVME&#x2F;SSDs for random IO. They then serve out NFS traffic. Now, you can either have a clustered file system underneth, or not. (Having stand alone servers can be advantageous, if you can map your filesystem out hierarchically)<p>Now, unless you have a Storage area network, then the last option is just begging for shit performance. You really don&#x27;t want IO traffic fighting with network traffic. However, if you want raw throughput, this is the way to go, but be warned, you won&#x27;t get any friendly help if you accidentally disconnect a disk.<p>Basically, kubernetes&#x2F;HPC and storage is a solved problem <i>ducks</i> no really, just map in NFS shares and be done with it. If its exotic, its probably going to fail hard, and in ungoogleable ways. More importantly only a few people are going to be able to help, and they may or may not still employed at your company.
评论 #13682026 未加载
评论 #13683477 未加载
评论 #13685371 未加载
dankohn1about 8 years ago
In addition to Rook <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rook.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rook.io&#x2F;</a> , which CoreOS mentions and we need to add, please take a look at the other cloud-native storage options listed on the CNCF cloud native landscape: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;cncf&#x2F;landscape" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;cncf&#x2F;landscape</a><p>Disclosure: I&#x27;m executive director of CNCF, and co-author of the landscape.
评论 #13680582 未加载
评论 #13681484 未加载
sysexitabout 8 years ago
I called it here, right at the initial announcement:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11816951" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11816951</a><p>This is just too hard of a problem to solve frivolously. Kudos to CoreOS for trying, and coming to the inevitable conclusion sooner rather than later.
123jfeichabcabout 8 years ago
This is good news - CoreOS needs to focus on what&#x27;s most important to their core business to be successful.<p>Being chock full of bright, relatively young and enthusiastic engineers drunk on the Golang kool-aid, there&#x27;s a very real risk of getting distracted by reimplementing everything under the sun in their favorite shiny new language.<p>Even if Torus is a good idea, CoreOS has to prioritize, commit, and execute. They can&#x27;t afford too many diversions. This is a competitive space, their opportunity window and runway are both limited, as usual.
SEJeffabout 8 years ago
I kind of wonder if there will ever be a kubernetes operator built for Ceph (not rook ontop of Ceph). Besides it being a bit of a PITA to maintain, Ceph is about as good as exists regarding OSS distributed object storage currently. If they could kill some of the operational overhead via an operator that did much of it, they might have a serious winner on their hands. Note that I&#x27;m just referring to the radosgw bits for the S3 style storage API, not the posix filesystem bits.
评论 #13693630 未加载
marknadalabout 8 years ago
Dangit, I trust the CoreOS team more&#x2F;better than a lot of people in the space. Torus would have been so useful.<p>At the other end of the spectrum though, maybe this is reasonable? As a developer, my first thoughts for &quot;I want my own S3&quot; is not etcd (strong consistency) but projects like <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;minio&#x2F;minio" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;minio&#x2F;minio</a> , or even using eventually consistent SQLite replication &#x2F; synchronization tools <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gundb&#x2F;sqlite" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;gundb&#x2F;sqlite</a> .<p>So that makes me ask about rook.io too, what layer of the &quot;stack&quot; is it trying to fit into? Obviously pretty low, but that also seems unnecessary (and part of why I suspect Torus is stopping).
评论 #13682320 未加载
gekuabout 8 years ago
Does anyone have experience with <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rook.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;rook.io&#x2F;</a> which is mentioned in the message?
aeriouxabout 8 years ago
could anyone more familiar with the situation give context around the decision + what is happening moving forward?<p>Thanks
评论 #13679469 未加载
epowell2017about 8 years ago
Anyone looking at openEBS.io? This is open source scale out block for containers.
评论 #13686852 未加载
usgroupabout 8 years ago
Those of us in the game for some time ultimately read &quot;beta&quot; to mean &quot;30% chance of survival&quot; so this doesn&#x27;t come as a surprise but it probably isn&#x27;t true for our more optimistic colleagues.<p>I think more tempered marketing would have really helped.
评论 #13679668 未加载
alrsabout 8 years ago
I understand they don&#x27;t hand out Internet points for this sort of thing anymore: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11816821" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11816821</a>
评论 #13681203 未加载
fidgetabout 8 years ago
Well that seems eminently reasonable
smlacyabout 8 years ago
What&#x27;s Torus and why should I care?
alrsabout 8 years ago
The next question that needs to be answered at CoreOS: &quot;Why, exactly, are we maintaining our own Linux distro when the Go binaries that we&#x27;re writing can mostly ignore userspace?&quot;
评论 #13682078 未加载