Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It takes a fair bit of experience before you can recognise the warning flags, though.

Most folks don't realise how simple their requirements are. Most folks need to put files on a server and start a process. What they don't need is a whole mass of rickety scaffolding and control plane infrastructure that gets them halfway (and only halfway) to running an in-house PaaS.

So having kicked the tyres on Docker and been appalled by the messy design and dreadful tool quality, I went back to using OS-native packages and isolating our microservices via (gasp) user IDs.

Judging by their product direction I suspect Docker's board want them to challenge VMware, which (rubbing my crystal ball) suggests to me that their future is a bloated and overcomplicated piece of Enterprise, targeted at companies who think you can buy devops.



Well container came out of slimming down VMs.

Meaning that rather than moving a whole OS from hardware to hardware, or spin them up or down as load required, you would spin up or down processes and their runtime requirements from a known functioning image.

Thus removing the overhead of the VMs hardware emulation and the need to run so many kernels.

The response from the VM world to containerization seems to be to push unikernels. Effectively going back to the DOS days where you have just the minimal kernel and userland, all living "happily" in the same (virtual) memory space.


Well, thats what cgroups and chroot is for, but then docker is just a fancy wrapper.....

As for performance, if its critical then get a real server, if you've got decent change management (ie ansible, puppet et al with no manual intervention) Then its no effort.

(seriously network boot, and vlans are your friend here.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: