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

Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

sirupsen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 290 posts

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#51

Post by hangonhn »

From my experience it is still buggy. For example, this bug:

https://forums.docker.com/t/docker-export-intermediate-size-...

No one seems to know anything about it.

Also, when we upgraded from 1.6.3 to 1.7, devicemapper started having issues.

On top of the bugs, the limited networking support is very, well, limiting.

I would be very hesitant about using it in production at the moment. That said, I can also see the potentials and it seems to be heading in the right direction. It's just not ready at this moment.

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#52

Post by LoSboccacc »

zaargy wrote: post #11

TL;DR It's too damn complicated if you're not Google/Twitter/Netflix. Most people would be fine just deploying OS packages and keeping their stacks as simple as possible.

Same here. AMI with direct from git updates when they start. Docker as part of the build and deploy process of upgrades is gonna be too costly anyway, because setting up the first configuration takes time, moving the containers take time etc.

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#53

Post by jkyle »

therealmarv wrote: post #15

I would be sold on Docker if that would be easy. I have e.g. this stack: - 1 webserver/proxy, let's say nginx - 1 simple Rest API server, let's say in flask - 1 database, let's say PostgreSQL and I want to connect all 3 things and I want to preserve logs for the whole time and preserve the state of the database (of course). Also not to forget make all bulletproof for the Internet. And here all sorts of problems arise…

The article makes a lot of good points, but the stack you're speaking of would be pretty trivial to get going...particular if you did it on a single host setup. You could probably have it spun up in an afternoon with Ansible or some such.

Multi-Host is moderately more difficult. A full orchestration and resource scheduling stack that scales with load even more so.

But you have to ask what your needs are if you're being realistic.

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#54

Post by rubiquity »

xkarga00 wrote: post #44
rubiquity wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that a person with a total of 3 nodes use a system like Kubernetes which requires at a minimum (correct me if I'm wrong) 5 nodes just to function? If you really, really want to use Docker with a typical Nginx-App-DB setup just whip up the necessary shell commands to start/stop/log containers and throw that in Ansible or the like. edit: I guess you can cram all of the various Kubernetes master/etcd…

How did you come up with that number of nodes?

Sorry I was wrong. I assumed based on Kubernetes' use of etcd it would be 3+ nodes. It turns out Kubernetes master is a single node currently which means they haven't built high availability into the master at all... which is a pretty scary way to run a thing that manages your entire infrastructure. There's already a few topics on the mailing list about etcd losing its data and Kubernetes doesn't know how to recover. Yuck.

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#55

Post by jgrowl »

amouat wrote: post #41
nailer wrote: post #7

The security question (it's possible to break out of containers) isn't solved, and the workaround (use VMs) eliminates many of the advantages of containers and adds a massive burden.

> it's possible to break out of containers Prove it. I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's certainly not trivial. Also, take a look at what Joyent are doing with Triton.

I was going to mention Triton/SDC. It does solve the security issues though it does it by running SmartOS. SDC is pretty cool but docker really needs to be secure in its own right.

It is also worth mentioning that since Joyent has implemented their own docker client, not all features are there yet. Last time I tried docker-compose didn't really work right yet. There is a full list of divergences on their github page. It has a lot of potential though.

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#56

Post by LoSboccacc »

mariusmg wrote: post #42

Maybe because Docker isn't really needed ? I mean if your app needs the entire fucking OS to provide isolation from other apps, then you are clearly doing it wrong.

eh, this is part of hiring the cheapest people to save the bottom line. it creates problems where there should be none.

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#57

Post by peu4000 »

I'd really love to include docker in our puppet testing framework, so we can do actual meaningful tests without deploying to real environments.

But, dealing with all of the problems of deploying docker to production doesn't look worth the time investment for a medium sized company IMO(we're at ~1700 vms)

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#58

Post by spinningarrow »

benjaminwootton wrote: post #31

"However, for many production users today, the pros do not outweigh the cons. Docker has done fantastically well at making containers appeal to developers for development, testing and CI environments—however, it has yet to disrupt production." I keep hearing about people putting Docker in dev and test environments and not production. This use case makes no sense to me as you would throw away the entire point of conta…

Does anyone have any good links to using Docker for development?

Even a simple `npm install` in a docker container fails on Windows because of the lack of support symlinks (adding --no-bin-links means npm's run scripts can't be used to their full and useful extent).

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#59

Post by Benjamin_Dobell »

gsharma wrote: post #48
Benjamin_Dobell wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have zero problem with a hybrid setup. I'm not running Docker just for the sake of running Docker. I'm running Docker (specifically Dokku) because it drastically simplifies deploying new builds, and graduating those builds between environments. I know a large part of this article was that Docker complicates rather than simplifies the situation. I guess if you're trying to be a Docker purist (for no reason) then sur…

If the goal is to simplify deployment process, why not use something like Capistrano or Fabric? You can run 'Cap deploy '

Because, as mentioned, I already deploy in one line:

    git push deploy/uat
and I didn't have to write a single deployment script to achieve it.

Plus, by using Dokku I get the benefits of containerised apps.

Re: Why Docker Is Not Yet Succeeding Widely in Production

#60

Post by davexunit »

knicholes wrote: post #19
therealmarv wrote: post #15

I would be sold on Docker if that would be easy. I have e.g. this stack: - 1 webserver/proxy, let's say nginx - 1 simple Rest API server, let's say in flask - 1 database, let's say PostgreSQL and I want to connect all 3 things and I want to preserve logs for the whole time and preserve the state of the database (of course). Also not to forget make all bulletproof for the Internet. And here all sorts of problems arise…

docker-compose comes to save the day when it comes to how to connect containers. Your Dockerfile will specify which underlying OS is used. Preserve state of your database with data volumes.

Too bad they bundle a version of OpenSSL with known security vulnerabilities that hasn't been fixed in the month since it's been brought to their attention.
Post reply on HN