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

Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

blog.docker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 64 posts

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#21

Post by patrickg_zill »

shykes wrote: post #5
emdd wrote: post #4

ELI5 the OCI & why it's important? I follow Docker from a distance and find it fascinating.

Disclaimer: I work at Docker. Docker has become a de facto standard for executing programs in a portable sandbox (aka "container"). There were increasing demands for making it a "proper" standard, so last year we donated a spec and reference implementation for a universal intermediary format - a "PDF of containers" if you will, and partnered with the Linux Foundation to manage it. The majority of the industry followe…

I am sorry if this comes across as mean-spirited, but, I think it is quite disingenuous to claim that Docker is a "de facto standard".

OpenVZ for instance, has well over 77K host-nodes which run over 840K containers.

These are not ephemeral setups on someone's laptop but servers that companies are spending money on each month to have in a datacenter.

IMHO (because the reporting method requires a small stats program to run, which is optional and many don't run it) there are 2 to 10 times more in actual existence.

Source: https://stats.openvz.org/

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#22

Post by kalmar »

alex1 wrote: post #14
wmf wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "standardization" is pretty kludgey if you have to docker pull then docker export.

I think that's because OCI currently only has a specification for the runtime, not the distributable image. But it seems like as of a few weeks ago, work is underway to standardize the distributable image as well: https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec

I was almost excited! From the FAQ on the project you linked [0]:

> Q: Why doesn't this project mention distribution?

> A: Distribution, for example using HTTP as both Docker v2.2 and AppC do today, is currently out of scope on the OCI Scope Table. There has been some discussion on the TOB mailing list to make distribution an optional layer but this topic is a work in progress.

I really hope CoreOS manage to get distribution into the scope for OCI. We need to move beyond Docker images. Standardizing on-disk layout in OCI is only mildly useful in my opinion.

[0] https://github.com/opencontainers/image-spec#faq

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#23

Post by simula67 »

shykes wrote: post #5
emdd wrote: post #4

ELI5 the OCI & why it's important? I follow Docker from a distance and find it fascinating.

Disclaimer: I work at Docker. Docker has become a de facto standard for executing programs in a portable sandbox (aka "container"). There were increasing demands for making it a "proper" standard, so last year we donated a spec and reference implementation for a universal intermediary format - a "PDF of containers" if you will, and partnered with the Linux Foundation to manage it. The majority of the industry followe…

Am I correct in assuming that containers specified by OCI can be exported and managed by other tools like lmctfy. You see your competitive advantage being in docker.

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#25

Post by vacri »

tveita wrote: post #17
falcolas wrote: post #10

You know, standardization is a great thing. But, fuck, another major release with huge changes... What ever happened to stable architectures with hardening burn in periods? What new bugs are going to creep in due to these huge changes? How is this going to break our work arounds for previous versions? It's a great time to be in operations, containers are a huge step forward, but how are we supposed to be confident in…

If you want something stable I'd stay away from containers and use well-tested technologies like VMs and configuration management. In my experience many of the tools in the container ecosystem are in the early adopter phase, promising a lot of convenience for some use cases, but too buggy and feature incomplete to really deliver yet. Not to mention the breaking changes and occasional migration to a new tool.

We were using docker up to about a year ago, and ripped it out for just this reason - we didn't have the time available to keep coding the workarounds. Great if you have the time, not so great if you don't.

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#26

Post by vacri »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #21
shykes wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I work at Docker. Docker has become a de facto standard for executing programs in a portable sandbox (aka "container"). There were increasing demands for making it a "proper" standard, so last year we donated a spec and reference implementation for a universal intermediary format - a "PDF of containers" if you will, and partnered with the Linux Foundation to manage it. The majority of the industry followe…

I am sorry if this comes across as mean-spirited, but, I think it is quite disingenuous to claim that Docker is a "de facto standard". OpenVZ for instance, has well over 77K host-nodes which run over 840K containers. These are not ephemeral setups on someone's laptop but servers that companies are spending money on each month to have in a datacenter. IMHO (because the reporting method requires a small stats program t…

'a' defacto standard, not 'the' defacto standard.

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#27

Post by ibotty »

wmf wrote: post #6
sengork wrote: post #3

Standardisation at the format level will help with portability across different platform implementations.

This "standardization" is pretty kludgey if you have to docker pull then docker export.

There are other tools that can get data from a docker v2 registry.

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#28

Post by shykes »

patrickg_zill wrote: post #21
shykes wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer: I work at Docker. Docker has become a de facto standard for executing programs in a portable sandbox (aka "container"). There were increasing demands for making it a "proper" standard, so last year we donated a spec and reference implementation for a universal intermediary format - a "PDF of containers" if you will, and partnered with the Linux Foundation to manage it. The majority of the industry followe…

I am sorry if this comes across as mean-spirited, but, I think it is quite disingenuous to claim that Docker is a "de facto standard". OpenVZ for instance, has well over 77K host-nodes which run over 840K containers. These are not ephemeral setups on someone's laptop but servers that companies are spending money on each month to have in a datacenter. IMHO (because the reporting method requires a small stats program t…

You don't come across as mean spirited, it's a fair point.

I didn't mean that Docker is the most widely deployed software in a particular category (that would be hard to measure accurately anyway). But what Docker introduced is the use of containers to deliver software, not just boot servers. Developers use Docker to package and publish their runnable artifacts, in very large numbers. For example Docker Hub passed 2.5 billion image downloads. Many more images are certainly transferred between private nodes every day. OpenVZ does have a concept of templates (I was an avid user in past life) but they were never intended as a means to distribute applications. In that regard Docker is undisputably the de facto standard.

I hope this clarifies my meaning.

PS. OpenVZ is awesome. I remember when we made the switch from ovz to lxc in 2010, when it became clear which would get merged mainstream, and we could finally ditch our double-patched xen+ovz kernels. The transition was very painful! What we missed most was the "bean counters" feature, ovz stats were unmatched for quite some time.

Re: Docker 1.11: The first OCI-compliant runtime, built on containerd

#30

Post by unexistance »

mhd wrote: post #24

As someone who spent too much time with Oracle, this headline is quite confusing (OCI => Oracle Call Interface). Computing has a serious TLA issue.

ha, googling gives me OCI Open Catalog Interface, some SAP standard for SRP software, which makes no sense in docker context, at all :D
Post reply on HN