Live data from Hacker News

Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

blog.docker.com

21–30 of 76 posts

Re: Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

#21
post #15
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And anything related to FreeBSD Jail support? :)

Docker != Jails (not in any way, shape, nor form). Please stop trying to make Docker into everything it's not.

Docker currently uses LXC. Isn't it reasonable to suggest porting it to other jail-solutions?

Re: Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

#22
post #12

Maybe a bit off-topic. I haven't found a satisfactory solution to having communicating containers across multiple hosts. There seems to be quite a few solutions in the making (libswarm, geard, etc). How are other people solving this (in production, beyond two or three hosts)?

https://github.com/cpuguy83/docker-grand-ambassador https://github.com/progrium/ambassadord

Re: Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

#23
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Docker != Jails (not in any way, shape, nor form). Please stop trying to make Docker into everything it's not.

Docker currently uses LXC. Isn't it reasonable to suggest porting it to other jail-solutions?

Well, simplifying here, but Docker is more-or-less a fancy wrapper for LXC.

FreeBSD Jails do a lot more than just make applications portable -- they provide security and isolation between applications (like a super chroot). Jails can be used to safely provide application hosting for various clients while Docker should only be used for your applications (jails prevent clients from messing with the host system nor each other, while Docker applications can, making it not secure for a multiple-client hosted system -- but then again, it was not designed to do that).

So, no, it's not reasonable to want to "port" Docker to anything since Docker is it's own thing. It would be more reasonable to port docker to FreeBSD (it it weren't already) than to say to "port" it to a Jail, or request it operate like a Jail (unless you got those features into LXC first, which LXC isn't, and therefore it wont).

~

A better (but admittedly over-simplified) comparison would be Jails are closer to application virtualization and Docker is closer to application portability. Very different problems they are solving.

Re: Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

#24
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Docker currently uses LXC. Isn't it reasonable to suggest porting it to other jail-solutions?

Well, simplifying here, but Docker is more-or-less a fancy wrapper for LXC. FreeBSD Jails do a lot more than just make applications portable -- they provide security and isolation between applications (like a super chroot). Jails can be used to safely provide application hosting for various clients while Docker should only be used for your applications (jails prevent clients from messing with the host system nor each…

I don't think you are understanding what docker is doing.

Docker interfaces with the kernel to provide security and isolation via cgroups and namespaces. This is exactly what jails does, and is indeed on the list of things to be added. It's really a matter of someone taking the time to write the driver for it.

Docker also provides an image format and infrastructure for helping to make applications portable.

Re: Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

#25
post #3

Hi all, no World-changing features in this one, but we believe that over time, relentless incremental improvements can make a huge difference. This week we are freezing all feature merges and focusing on refactoring, code cleanup and generally repaying as much technical debt as possible. We are also considering a gradual slowdown of the release cadence (we currently cut a release every month), to give more time for Q…

Are you kidding?. Ability to modify /etc/hosts and specifying exact Capabilities is awesome. Thanks for the great work. I for one waited very long for this :)

Hi Solomon! I agree with prudhvis here - I think this is quite a nice add!

Keep up the good work!

Re: Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

#26
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Etcd isn't consisdered production grade?

Well, Docker just slapped a "1.0" sticker on and called itself "production ready" when it clearly wasn't (features like in this 1.2 release are kind of mandatory for any serious deployments).

You could already do these things outside of dockerland via the host-integration stuff (ie, systemd to handle restarts/monitoring).

1.0 was/is about API stability, engine stability, full ecosystem with Docker Hub, and enterprise support.

Re: Docker 1.2.0, with restart policies

#29
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Docker currently uses LXC. Isn't it reasonable to suggest porting it to other jail-solutions?

Well, simplifying here, but Docker is more-or-less a fancy wrapper for LXC. FreeBSD Jails do a lot more than just make applications portable -- they provide security and isolation between applications (like a super chroot). Jails can be used to safely provide application hosting for various clients while Docker should only be used for your applications (jails prevent clients from messing with the host system nor each…

Docker definitely does all of the things you describe jails as doing.
Post reply on HN