Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

iron.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 68 posts

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#51

Post by karmajunkie »

wcummings wrote: post #26
mstade wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but what caught my eye was: > About the author > Hey! I’m Marc, an eighteen years old software engineer located in Germany. You're obviously quite knowledgeable and well spoken for such a young age, and presumably English isn't your first language either. I just wanted to say keep up the good work, you have a bright future ahead of you – kudos!

Surprised he advertises his age, I started working around that age and pretty deliberately avoided age as a topic of discussion. Age is something best left unmentioned in a professional context.

Its the kind of thing most people learn after they wish they'd learned it earlier :)

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#52

Post by marianoguerra »

wcummings wrote: post #26
mstade wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but what caught my eye was: > About the author > Hey! I’m Marc, an eighteen years old software engineer located in Germany. You're obviously quite knowledgeable and well spoken for such a young age, and presumably English isn't your first language either. I just wanted to say keep up the good work, you have a bright future ahead of you – kudos!

Surprised he advertises his age, I started working around that age and pretty deliberately avoided age as a topic of discussion. Age is something best left unmentioned in a professional context.

I used to do it a lot until I noticed, I think it's related to the first topics you learn while learning English (presenting yourself, name, age, where you come from).

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#53

Post by sjclemmy »

bgaid wrote: post #49
petetnt wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happen to have a link at hand where I could read up on this? Tried searching for it but drew blank.

From the creator, Sebastian McKenzie: https://medium.com/@sebmck/2015-in-review-51ac7035e272#.e80o...

Awesome read. Sounds like a great guy.

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#54

Post by _query »

wcummings wrote: post #26
mstade wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but what caught my eye was: > About the author > Hey! I’m Marc, an eighteen years old software engineer located in Germany. You're obviously quite knowledgeable and well spoken for such a young age, and presumably English isn't your first language either. I just wanted to say keep up the good work, you have a bright future ahead of you – kudos!

Surprised he advertises his age, I started working around that age and pretty deliberately avoided age as a topic of discussion. Age is something best left unmentioned in a professional context.

Thanks for the advice. I've thought about it a little bit and decided to remove it with my next update to the web page.

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#55

Post by fapjacks »

_query wrote: post #11

> Docker enables you to package up your application along with all of the application’s dependencies into a nice self-contained image. You can then use use that image to run your application in containers. Actually docker was created to enable easy scaling of web applications. If you want to package your application up take a look at some modern package managers. By using a modern package manager like nix you can wor…

Nah. I don't like articles with phrases like "you are doing it wrong" when it comes to Docker, because Docker affords you choice. It is up to you to make the choices, and there are some "best practices" around using Docker, but there is no "right way" to use this technology. Use what is "right" for your environment and avoid platitudes like "you are doing it wrong". Anybody that wants a taste of what I'm talking about should stop by #docker on Freenode and see how people are using it.

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#56

Post by simonebrunozzi »

_query wrote: post #30
mstade wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mostly agree with what you're saying, but what caught my eye was: > About the author > Hey! I’m Marc, an eighteen years old software engineer located in Germany. You're obviously quite knowledgeable and well spoken for such a young age, and presumably English isn't your first language either. I just wanted to say keep up the good work, you have a bright future ahead of you – kudos!

Thanks, made my day :) In case you found some spelling or grammar mistakes let me know.

Agree with mstade - very impressive for your age.

I just sent you a private email.

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#57

Post by cyphar »

TheDong wrote: post #5
lox wrote: post #3

Do we really need to brand using smaller containers as microcontainers? Why not submit these as pull requests to the official docker images rather than introducing more fragmentation? Also worth noting that the official docker images are moving towards alpine. Of course if you have ruby or node apps your biggest space hog is still going to be your packages.

There's also a very good reason to not move some things to alpine, including ruby and node applications. A significant number of ruby and nodejs apps depend on some c/c++ code hidden away in this module or that gem. Any time you're compiling c/c++ code, you run into a chance of musl vs libc causing differences. These differences can range from building requiring different options to the application having strange per…

One solution would be to have a "build" image that produces your binary or set of packages you need and then a "service" image that actually runs it.

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#58

Post by lox »

TheDong wrote: post #5
lox wrote: post #3

Do we really need to brand using smaller containers as microcontainers? Why not submit these as pull requests to the official docker images rather than introducing more fragmentation? Also worth noting that the official docker images are moving towards alpine. Of course if you have ruby or node apps your biggest space hog is still going to be your packages.

There's also a very good reason to not move some things to alpine, including ruby and node applications. A significant number of ruby and nodejs apps depend on some c/c++ code hidden away in this module or that gem. Any time you're compiling c/c++ code, you run into a chance of musl vs libc causing differences. These differences can range from building requiring different options to the application having strange per…

Sure, but you have it the wrong way around. The default should be slim and Ubuntu/Debian/etc should be an alternative.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11000827

Re: Microcontainers – Tiny, Portable Docker Containers

#60

Post by treeder »

_query wrote: post #11

> Docker enables you to package up your application along with all of the application’s dependencies into a nice self-contained image. You can then use use that image to run your application in containers. Actually docker was created to enable easy scaling of web applications. If you want to package your application up take a look at some modern package managers. By using a modern package manager like nix you can wor…

I"m pretty sure that's not why Docker was created. And Nix is definitely not a simpler solution for packaging/dependency management. It's a good idea, but with all the advantages of Docker (full isolation, flexibility of using any OS and any package manager, easy distribution), why bother with Nix?
Post reply on HN