> Kubernetes aims to provide all the features needed to run Docker-based applications including cluster management, scheduling, service discovery, monitoring, secrets management and more. Nomad only aims to focus on cluster management and scheduling and is designed with the Unix philosophy of having a small scope while composing with tools like [Hashicorp] Consul for service discovery/service mesh and [Hashicorp] Vault for secret management.
> Nomad is architecturally much simpler. Nomad is a single binary, both for clients and servers, and requires no external services for coordination or storage. Nomad combines a lightweight resource manager and a sophisticated scheduler into a single system. By default, Nomad is distributed, highly available, and operationally simple.
Like all of Hashicorp's tools, they are more complicated and error-prone than they first appear, because they stuff too much functionality in one binary. But it does let you implement one piece at a time, so you can make incremental improvements as you need them.
What do you think is "too much functionality in one binary"? With Nomad I feel like the opposite is true: Nomad is just a workload scheduler. If I need service discovery I can add Consul, if I need secrets management I can add vault. Honestly curious by what you meant exactly and how Kubernetes does it better / easier.
