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

Docker in Production: An Update

thehftguy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 97 posts

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#81

Post by mdekkers »

mwpmaybe wrote: post #25
mdekkers wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's Linux. It's Debian. You can run any kernel you want. The guy works in finance, not an area where you can typically say "oh, no worries, we'll just push out this distro with a non-standard kernel." Enterprise IT, and specifically finance (and healthcare) have different requirements. Currently working with a client where not only the full technology stack has to be certified by accountable vendors, but all the int…

I have (or had, I guess) an 11 year career in Fortune ~100 finance and healthcare. Agreed on all points. However, they're already experimenting with Debian, Ubuntu LTS (just not 16.04), kernels, custom AMIs, and different Docker versions. It's not a stretch to imagine they have the ability to deploy a back-ported kernel, or build and/or use an AMI that includes one. Also, HFT practices (or lack thereof) are far from…

Also, HFT practices (or lack thereof) are far from the staid enterprise practices you may be thinking of.

Absolutely right.

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#82

Post by mdekkers »

cdelsolar wrote: post #63
mdekkers wrote: post #19

Every three months or so I tell myself "right,get your finger out, and do something production quality with containers" and come to the same conclusion this guy did.

Have you tried? Make some Dockerfiles, upload to ECR, deploy to an ECS cluster. Hooray, no more dealing with dependency hell and config management.

yeah, I tried....

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#83

Post by user5994461 »

mwpmaybe wrote: post #42
user5994461 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are saying that all default settings are unusable in production, to the point docker might not start at all, and the only cure is series of 5 obscure advanced system setup/configuration that are almost impossible to figure out by oneself and not documented, yet they should be totally obvious to anyone using Docker, right? FYI: It's because of this sort of bullshit that there are articles called "Docker in Prod…

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that Ubuntu Server 16.04 LTS comes out of the box without AUFS and Device Mapper, and that you either need to enable one or the other before installing Docker or prevent Docker from starting automatically at install time. It sucks, yes, but your description of the problem and its solution is beyond hyperbolic. Googling "docker ubuntu install hang" takes you right to the GitH…

The GitHub issue: https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/23347

And there goes my hope of ever running Docker on Ubuntu with any success.

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#84

Post by mdekkers »

dastbe wrote: post #33
mdekkers wrote: post #19

Every three months or so I tell myself "right,get your finger out, and do something production quality with containers" and come to the same conclusion this guy did.

production quality as in "in production" or as in "something that i will actually use in my day to day"?

production quality as in "I will be happy to run my clients' stacks on this, and won't worry about being woken up in the middle of the night by pagerduty" - I have this right now, and although there are more things I want, the pricetag is too high to justify. I have been doing VM (and container) work since a one of the fist versions of VMWare blew my mind, but given the fact that things work well for me right now, there is no pressing problem to solve. It's a cool way to do things, and I am fully on board with the ideas behind it, but right now it simply doesn't solve any problems I have, and only introduces a ton of new ones.

There is no payback for the hassle...

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#85

Post by erikb »

Lot of memes, but a little more facts, statistics, links to bug reports etc would have been nice. It may all be true, but how can I decide if I believe it or not? It's not that I know you, dear author, and therefore could trust your personal judgement. Make your point a little more clearly. Please.

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#86

Post by nunez »

jhasse wrote: post #68
kordless wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't cry, you can run bash on Windows 10 now!

You could always run bash on Windows using Cygwin or MSYS before.

LXSS (Bash on Ubuntu on Windows) is an honest-to-goodness installation of Ubuntu running on top of Windows using the Linux subsystem. Cygwin/MSYS are more limited in comparison (or at least I have found them to be so).

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#87

Post by crb »

user5994461 wrote: post #77
crb wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The default distro is Container Optimised OS: https://cloud.google.com/container-optimized-os/docs/ . It's derived from Chromium OS, which means we can take advantage of the team who build images for the many devices which use it, and the security response infrastructure around it. With 'docker info' on a node you can see we use OverlayFS, which seems a popular choice in the community also: http://burkelibbey.s3.amaz…

So, customized Google OS, but using the official Docker package? Oh wait. How could there be an official docker package for an OS noone known existed? I assume customized kernel as well? and where does the overlay drivers come from? How much custom back-ports and custom development? The article is not on point to say GKE replaced docker entirely then... but you are not point to deny and pretend that you are running D…

Chromium OS is open source: https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os. OverlayFS is in the upstream Linux kernel.

CoreOS is a very similar idea, and given that, we don't make builds of the container images available outside GCE.

Customers who need specifics of the OS (that they can't find them by just looking at the kernel config on the node) are welcome to ping us a support ticket.

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#88

Post by jzelinskie »

coding123 wrote: post #47
merb wrote: post #13

the problem is, that the docker (community) or rather the company behind it, focuses on too much, instead of just doing one thing and doing it great. no they need to reimplement the world and create their own kubernetes (or some sort of it). their new website is less accessible as it was in the old version, etc... and all the new projects and people. and the various ways to configure docker. why does a simple contain…

I'd like to see Rkt/Coreos folks start showing how their stuff IS accessible than keep spewing this flamewar crap on HN. I've had nothing but excellent comments from the Kube developers, but every time a Rkt dev or fan comes on here, this is the crap we get.

I think you might be conflating pot stirrers with actual rkt devs. CoreOS (along with many other companies) are the Kubernetes developers.

FWIW, there was drama with the initial rkt announcement, but we've actually seen docker adopt most of the original criticisms and that should be applauded for both CoreOS and Docker.

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#89

Post by yebyen »

abbyaws wrote: post #44
yebyen wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has Amazon spent a lot of effort on ECS? I am totally ignorant here, but the people who I consider more knowledgeable about AWS things have said in a nutshell that "in 2015 the things I heard about ECS were not good things, and I have basically not heard any new things since then." Basically stating that ECS was Amazon's attempt to plant a flag in the container-space and that it was half-hearted, not done with the ri…

hey yebyen- i was one of the very first beta users of ECS, and I now work for AWS. first off, sounds like maybe we're not doing the best job we can be with educating users on ECS- that's on us, and we'll focus on improving. to dig into your actual question: when ECS launched, the goal was to do a smaller number of things really well, and then listen to the community on what _they_ wanted to see from a container manag…

From an engineering POV, this line makes the most sense out of all:

> when ECS launched, the goal was to do a smaller number of things really well, and then listen to the community on what _they_ wanted to see from a container management platform, and grow accordingly

I'm coming from a small CoreOS cluster on bare metal, onto Kubernetes and Helm on EC2 nodes. I was a Fleet user before and I loved it! But always with the understanding that when things got better in the cluster space, I'd move from Fleet toward some resource aware scheduler.

I love to read how you're all going down a similar road, however you get there! Thanks for the blox links and I think I will be able to make immediate use of ECR with the rest of my AWS stack.

Re: Docker in Production: An Update

#90

Post by adictator »

StreamBright wrote: post #55
marios wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Solaris within Oracle is as good as dead from the latest reports. However, Illumos is a Solaris descendant that is very much alive. It has all the good systems stuff that came out of Sun (zones, ZFS, DTrace) and is backed by Joyent (now part of Samsung). There's also FreeBSD jails that can be used to contain applications. I'm not sure about the timeline, but I think jails came first. Sun engineers wanted to achieve t…

Oracle is the company where great projects go and die.

Oracle is just death & evil incarnate.
Post reply on HN