Joe 
With more and more business use containerized applications, its platform of choice is rapidly growing to be kubernetes. Its ability to automate deployment, scaling, networking and management of applications across multiple environments makes it an inevitable part of any enterprise system. But when a business chooses to run Kubernetes, questions like should we manage it ourselves or should we go for kubernetes as a service come into mind.
Each solution has its own benefits and the optimum option will depend on the capability of your team, the goals of your own operation and the budget and scale of the feed processing operation.
Understanding the Two Approaches
Before comparing them, it is important to understand what each model involves.
Self-managed Kubernetes means your organization is responsible for deploying, configuring, securing, monitoring, and maintaining the entire Kubernetes environment. Your team controls every aspect of the infrastructure.
For kubernetes as a service, the cloud provider takes most of the burden of managing the infrastructure. Cluster provisioning, upgrades, maintenance and availability are managed far more effectively for you, giving teams the luxury of focusing on applications.
The Appeal of Full Control
One of the biggest reasons some organizations choose self-managed Kubernetes is control.
Teams can tailor networking, storage, security policies and cluster configurations to meet individual business needs. This will be useful for organizations with very specific workloads or where regulations need to be met.
In addition, self-managed environments enables companies to set their own prefered infrastructure architecture without having to comply with constrains of any managed platform.
For companies with experienced Kubernetes engineers, this level of control can be a significant advantage.
Why Many Businesses Prefer Kubernetes as a Service
While control is important, managing Kubernetes internally can become complicated very quickly.
A kubernetes as a service platform takes care of all this, so you’re freed up to build your solutions without having to worry about cluster management, software upgrades, security patches and those on-going infrastructure checks.
This enables development teams to concentrate on applications, instead of worrying about the infrastructure. This can lead to a faster time to market and lesser complexity.
Comparing Setup and Deployment Speed
Creating a self-managed Kubernetes environment can be complex and time-consuming. One or more teams will need to ramp up by provisioning the proper hardware and network configuration, setting security policies, and launching monitoring services, then they will be able to deploy apps.
This process can take considerable time and expertise.
In contrast, kubernetes as a service platforms allow organizations to deploy clusters within minutes. Majority of the infrastructure components are pre-built, which means teams can start provisioning and deploying applications literally out of the box.
Operational Responsibility and Maintenance
Kubernetes is a demanding product that necessitates ongoing tuning to be safe and trusted.
In a self-managed environment, teams must handle:
- Cluster upgrades
- Security patching
- Backup management
- Performance monitoring
- Node maintenance
- High availability configurations
These responsibilities often require human, technical and specialist resources.
Overall, kubernetes as a service alleviates much of the management overhead. The service provider takes care of many of these operational aspects, helping organizations to not waste resource on day-to-day management.
Cost Considerations Beyond Infrastructure
At first glance, self-managed Kubernetes may appear less expensive because there are no management fees. Yet infrastructure costs are only one component of the total costs.
Organizations must also consider:
- Engineering salaries
- Operational support
- Training costs
- Downtime risks
- Monitoring tools
- Security management
This cloud a kubernetes as a service solution can also bring these hidden costs down through streamlined operations and reducing the effort needed for maintenance.
Security and Compliance Factors
Security is a major consideration for any Kubernetes deployment.
In a self-managed environment, all security configurations can be directed from the environment itself. This flexibility could be expedient for companies needing rigorous compliance.
Yet providing security all the time requires ongoing effort. Teams need to constantly remember all updates, keep checking for weaknesses and security breaches, control who has access.
For organizations that lack dedicated security professionals, kubernetes as a service can be an effective way to lower risk and increase operational cost savings.
Scalability and Resource Management
Applications today tend to have highly variable loads. Kubernetes can scale applications appropriately, but requires a considerable amount of configuration at present.
Self-managed environments require teams to build and maintain scaling mechanisms themselves.
Managed platforms take the hassle out of it by providing autoscaling built-in and optimization for the resources.
When application demand fluctuates,kubernetes as a service providers can auto-tune resources such that performance is maintained at an optimal price point.
Which Option Works Best for Different Teams?
The right answer depends on what you are trying to achieve and what your organization can do.
Self-managed Kubernetes may be suitable for:
- Organizations with experienced Kubernetes engineers
- Businesses requiring deep infrastructure customization
- Enterprises with unique compliance requirements
- Teams that prefer complete operational control
However, taking kubernetes as a service and deploying it on premise can also be just the right thing:
- Startups focused on rapid growth
- Small and mid-sized businesses
- Teams with limited DevOps resources
- Organizations prioritizing speed and simplicity
- Companies looking to reduce infrastructure management tasks
Knowing what your team is good at and what is important to them is key to making it.
Looking Toward the Future
With the evolution of cloud-native technologies, many organizations are now choosing to move away from infrastructure, and look instead toward application innovation.
Managed services are becoming increasingly popular because they allow businesses to move faster while maintaining reliability and scalability.
As kubernetes as a service becomes more popular it will reduce the value of self-managed kubernetes for many (but not all) use cases. However, I believe that this is indicative of a larger trend in the industry that strives for ease of operation and efficiency.
Conclusion
Choosing between self-managed Kubernetes and kubernetes as a service is not simply a technical decision—it is a strategic one.
Managed Kubernetes provides an easier to operate environment, as fully managed services eliminate the complexity associated with running a fully self managed service. With Managed Kubernetes, your operations team can focus on building your product not infrastructure.
