27 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
27 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
# Comparison
|
|
|
|
## Kubespray vs Kops
|
|
|
|
Kubespray runs on bare metal and most clouds, using Ansible as its substrate for
|
|
provisioning and orchestration. [Kops](https://github.com/kubernetes/kops) performs the provisioning and orchestration
|
|
itself, and as such is less flexible in deployment platforms. For people with
|
|
familiarity with Ansible, existing Ansible deployments or the desire to run a
|
|
Kubernetes cluster across multiple platforms, Kubespray is a good choice. Kops,
|
|
however, is more tightly integrated with the unique features of the clouds it
|
|
supports so it could be a better choice if you know that you will only be using
|
|
one platform for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
|
## Kubespray vs Kubeadm
|
|
|
|
[Kubeadm](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubeadm) provides domain Knowledge of Kubernetes clusters' life cycle
|
|
management, including self-hosted layouts, dynamic discovery services and so
|
|
on. Had it belonged to the new [operators world](https://coreos.com/blog/introducing-operators.html),
|
|
it may have been named a "Kubernetes cluster operator". Kubespray however,
|
|
does generic configuration management tasks from the "OS operators" ansible
|
|
world, plus some initial K8s clustering (with networking plugins included) and
|
|
control plane bootstrapping.
|
|
|
|
Kubespray has started using `kubeadm` internally for cluster creation since v2.3
|
|
in order to consume life cycle management domain knowledge from it
|
|
and offload generic OS configuration things from it, which hopefully benefits both sides.
|