camil

I am aware of that. I'm also not using their object storage. Still prefer GCS mostly and sometimes S3 or R2. For the compute offering, I didn't experience major issues. I have some clusters with 100% uptime for more than 2 years.

Probably I don't deploy enough or the EU regions are more reliable, but I was not experiencing issues during cluster provisioning. It is true that since July there were various small issues, for me mostly around removing provisioned resources, especially firewall configurations. Also noticed the web sockets are failing most of the times now and have to hard refresh the page to see the updates.

Was innitially designed for Hetzner, but they way it has been bult, will allow expanding to any provider. Especially to providers that offer their own Kubernetes distribution.

Thanks for letting me know. Apparently there was a wrong permission set for the Google group.

Hetzner was an easy choice because you can attach persistent volumes, expose services using their load balancers, servers are fast and easy to provision and they probably have the best pricing. I run multiple clusters in Hetzner for over 4 years now and only had minor issues. Sometimes they do not have enough instances on a specific region, sometimes provisioning new instances can be delayed or they send emails to reboot the instances due to patches to their hypervisors. But most of the times runs stable. Few of my clusters have 100% uptime for more than 2 years.

I didn't have the chance to test their platform yet, but I expect it to be a mature product. My intentions with this platform are to make it more accessible to developers and small companies that do not have Kubernetes knowledge yet or want to spin clusters fast for development, testing etc.