# ByteLyst Single-VM Deployment > Deploy the **entire ByteLyst ecosystem** (31 services, 11 products) on a single Azure VM. > Two orchestration approaches — pick one or learn both side by side. Related: - [`../ENDPOINT_INVENTORY.md`](../ENDPOINT_INVENTORY.md) — canonical endpoint inventory across local, Azure VM, and domain-based ingress --- ## Approaches ### [`docker/`](docker/) — Docker Compose (Production-ready) Proven, battle-tested deployment using `docker-compose.ecosystem.yml`. Installs everything from scratch on a raw Ubuntu VM in ~20 minutes. Includes Gitea CI (act_runner) for continuous integration. ```bash sudo ./docker/setup.sh # Full install sudo ./docker/setup.sh --resume # Resume after disconnect /opt/bytelyst/check-health.sh # Verify all 30 services ``` **Use this if:** You want reliable deployment now. ### [`k8s/`](k8s/) — Kubernetes via k3s (Learning / Future-ready) Same 31 services orchestrated by Kubernetes on a single VM using k3s. Builds on the same Docker images — no Dockerfile changes needed. **Use this if:** You want to learn K8s with real services, practice `kubectl`, and prepare for multi-node scaling later. --- ## Architecture (shared by both approaches) ``` Raw Ubuntu 24.04 VM (Standard_D8s_v5: 8 vCPU, 32 GB RAM) ├── Ollama (systemd, :11434) ─── local LLM inference ├── Gitea (Docker/:3300) ──────── npm package registry + CI ├── act_runner (systemd) ──────── Gitea CI runner (host mode) └── 31 Services ├── Infrastructure (6): cosmos-emulator, azurite, mailpit, loki, grafana, traefik ├── Platform (3): platform-service, extraction-service, mcp-server ├── Dashboards (2): admin-web, tracker-web ├── Backends (10): peakpulse, chronomind, jarvisjr, nomgap, mindlyst, │ lysnrai, notelett, flowmonk, actiontrail, localmemgpt ├── Web Apps (9): lysnrai-dashboard, chronomind-web, jarvisjr-web, flowmonk-web, │ notelett-web, mindlyst-web, nomgap-web, actiontrail-web, localmemgpt-web └── Standalone (1): llmlab-dashboard (LLM Lab Mission Control) ``` ## Comparison | | Docker Compose | K8s (k3s) | | ------------------- | ------------------ | ---------------------------------- | | **Setup time** | ~20 min | ~30 min | | **RAM overhead** | ~100 MB | ~600 MB | | **Config files** | 1 compose + 1 .env | ~30 manifests (or Helm) | | **Scaling** | Manual | `kubectl scale` / HPA | | **Rolling updates** | Restart-based | Zero-downtime | | **Resource limits** | Basic | Fine-grained per pod | | **Multi-VM ready** | Docker Swarm | Native `kubectl join` | | **Learning value** | Low | High (transferable to AKS/EKS/GKE) | ## Recommendation **For a single Azure VM → use Docker Compose.** Here's why: 1. **One VM = no cluster benefits.** K8s shines at multi-node scheduling, auto-healing across hosts, and rolling deploys with replica sets. With 1 node, all pods compete for the same resources anyway. 2. **RAM matters.** k3s adds ~500-600 MB overhead. On a 32 GB VM running 31 services + Cosmos emulator + Ollama, that headroom is useful. 3. **Operational simplicity.** `docker compose logs -f platform-service` vs `kubectl logs deploy/platform-service -n bytelyst-platform -f` — Compose wins for a solo developer. 4. **Faster iteration.** `docker compose up --build flowmonk-backend` rebuilds + restarts in seconds. K8s requires image tag bumps, manifest edits, and `kubectl apply`. 5. **CI already runs on host.** act_runner uses host mode, not Docker-in-Docker. Compose services are reachable at `localhost:` — K8s NodePort adds a layer. **When to switch to K8s:** - Scaling beyond 1 VM (add nodes with `k3s agent`) - Need zero-downtime rolling updates for beta users - Want fine-grained resource limits per service - Preparing for AKS/EKS production migration The `k8s/` folder is ready for when you need it. Both approaches share the same Docker images and Gitea registry.