<p>I am new to Kubernetes.<br>
Last few days, I did performance test for API Gateway to compare both environments, Kubernetes and Native.<br>
I expected to get similar results in both types of tests, but the second test showed a 20% tps loss.</p>

<p>How to stress : RestfulAPI requests through API Gateway.<br>
Env 1 : <strong>Native</strong> (CentOS) - result : approximately <strong>1700 tps</strong><br>
Evn 2 : <strong>Kubernetes</strong>  - result : approximately <strong>1350 tps</strong><br>
* Hardware specifications were the same.</p>

<p>I wonder if this is a common result.<br>
In my opinion, 20% is too much loss.   </p>

<p>Sorry for my stupid question, but I am confused.  </p>

ironrainbow
<p>According to <a href="https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/what-is-kubernetes/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">k8s documentation</a></p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Kubernetes is a portable, extensible, open-source platform for managing containerized workloads and services, that facilitates both declarative configuration and automation. It has a large, rapidly growing ecosystem. Kubernetes services, support, and tools are widely available.</p>
  
  <p>The name Kubernetes originates from Greek, meaning helmsman or pilot.</p>
</blockquote>

<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubernetes" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Wikipedia</a> also says: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Kubernetes (κυβερνήτης, Greek for "governor", "helmsman" or "captain")</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Obviously, the captain’s advantages are not in speed but in the predictability of the work of the entire complex system as a whole</p>

<p>k8s strengths are:</p>

<ul>
<li>Service discovery and load balancing  </li>
<li>Storage orchestration  </li>
<li>Automated rollouts and rollbacks  </li>
<li>Automatic bin packing  </li>
<li>Self-healing  </li>
<li>Secret and configuration management  </li>
</ul>

<p>As you can see, the performance gain is not mentioned here. </p>

<p>P.S. There is <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21047676" rel="nofollow noreferrer">great comment</a> on HN discussion about Serverless hype (TL;DR: slowness and costiness):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>It's concerning how typical the hype machine is in IT. I believe Serverless has its place and value. So does Kubernetes or many other <em>products</em> that are often discussed on HN.</p>
  
  <p>But let's be clear, we are talking about commercial products and there is a capital interest in <em>selling</em> these services to all of us devs and engineers.</p>
  
  <p>So while use cases exists and benefits wait to be reaped, as a consultant I strongly feel that we should be MUCH more insistent in pointing out when a product does not make sense instead of jumping onto the hype train.</p>
  
  <p>I am basically surrounded by "LETS TRANSFORM EVERYTHING TO KUBERNETES THIS WEEK!" exclamations, conferences are basically "DID YOU ALREADY HEAR ABOUT KUBERNETES?" and so on ...</p>
  
  <p>It reminds me of Ruby on Rails, a mature and well-developed framework used by global tech firms (correct me if wrong: Airbnb, ~Stack Overflow~, Github) to handle parts of their backend in 2019. But for half a decade now even tiny companies have been screaming around about <em>FancyHTTPTechThisYear (tm)</em> because scale while reporting 1/500th of the traffic of some famous Rails users.</p>
  
  <p>This is not engineering with objectives in mind, it's more akin to the gaming community yelling for a new console.</p>
</blockquote>
