Compare

Bernato vs HashiCorp Nomad

Akshay Sarode
Quick verdict

Nomad is for production workloads at small-to-medium scale: containers, raw binaries, VMs, with placement, allocation, fault tolerance. Bernato is for AI agent supervision and homelab process management — simpler, mobile-first, with macOS sandboxing. Linux supports opt-in bwrap when available; Windows has limited Job Object containment without filesystem/network isolation. Different scopes.

Architecture

NomadBernato
SchedulersPluggable (system, batch, service, parameterized)None (you say where it runs)
Workload typesContainer, exec, raw_exec, VM, customOS processes (PTY)
Cluster size1–10,000+ nodes1–50 nodes (homelab/indie scale)
State storeRaft (HA)Firestore (cloud) + per-daemon SQLite
Placement constraintsYes (datacenter, OS, GPU, etc.)Manual (you pick the host)
Mobile UXNoneNative iOS/Android
Sandbox per taskContainer isolation if you use containersmacOS Seatbelt today; Linux/Windows trusted-host/open until parity ships
Activity logAudit logging exists, not hash-chained by defaultLocal activity log

When to pick Nomad

When to pick Bernato

Use both

Nomad for production services on a server fleet; Bernato on developer / researcher boxes. They're at different parts of the stack.

FAQ

Can I run Nomad and Bernato on the same machine?

Yes. They don't fight — Nomad's tasks are usually long-lived containers; Bernato's workload is interactive PTYs. Different process namespaces in practice.

Does Bernato plan to add scheduling?

No. The 'just say which host' model is intentional. Once you want a scheduler, you've outgrown Bernato and Nomad is right.