OSv is another, compatible with some unix apps http://osv.io
IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
11–20 of 85 posts
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#12finally the end of lx* containers on the way. not the actual end of course, who knows docker guys could buy this one as they did to some other unikernel companies.
I don't understand all the hatred towards containers. It's simply an OS abstraction to facilitate isolation. What's wrong with that? In fact I'd love to see more containers, especially on the Linux desktop: for example a container aware compositor that could render windows from container processes and color code their borders, like Qubes does.
I have nothing against VMs either. But even when they're tiny (as in the case of unikernels), do VMs scale as much as processes? I'm skeptical. Maybe someone has data.
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#13finally the end of lx* containers on the way. not the actual end of course, who knows docker guys could buy this one as they did to some other unikernel companies.
Jails and Zones did their jobs before LXC was a thing. The better technology doesn’t always win out — see Windows history.
Jails and Zones are inferior to Docker overall, the advantage of Docker is not the isolation technology but the whole workflow of using those containers.
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#14Do these unikernel OSs tend to be language specific? Like if this app is written in x language, use y OS?
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#15finally the end of lx* containers on the way. not the actual end of course, who knows docker guys could buy this one as they did to some other unikernel companies.
I don't understand all the hatred towards containers. It's simply an OS abstraction to facilitate isolation. What's wrong with that? In fact I'd love to see more containers, especially on the Linux desktop: for example a container aware compositor that could render windows from container processes and color code their borders, like Qubes does. I have nothing against VMs either. But even when they're tiny (as in the c…
People have turned containers in to a packaging, deployment, and orchestration tool rather than the original intent of lightweight virtualization.
Containers kinda suck for those 3 things but no other tool does all 3. It's a jack of all trades master of none situation.
I hate the trend of "download this container cause packaging a .deb is hard" etc.
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#16Worth watching is Justin Cormack's recent presentation on unikernels, LinuxKit, eBPF and databases such as SeaStar: The Modern Operating System In 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dR2FH8z7L04
Really enjoying this talk. Thanks for sharing!
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#17finally the end of lx* containers on the way. not the actual end of course, who knows docker guys could buy this one as they did to some other unikernel companies.
I don't understand all the hatred towards containers. It's simply an OS abstraction to facilitate isolation. What's wrong with that? In fact I'd love to see more containers, especially on the Linux desktop: for example a container aware compositor that could render windows from container processes and color code their borders, like Qubes does. I have nothing against VMs either. But even when they're tiny (as in the c…
> I don't understand all the hatred towards containers. It's simply an OS abstraction to facilitate isolation.
Containers on their own aren't enough to deploy a reliable production system. Even on a small scale. To use them for reals you need a lot of domain knowledge and the support of a large ecosystem like Docker. And even then it's easy to get stuck in a rats nest of brittle tooling.
I don't have anything against containers. I'm just tired the exaggerated "ease of use" claims (eg: I talk about container management being a non-trivial problem and people telling me "just user Kubernetes!").
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#18Would love to dig into this and try some small C servers.
FYI if anybody @ IncludeOS is here, the page at http://www.includeos.org/get-started.html automatically made a link out of the file path `./seed/service` as well as `your_service/service.cpp` and 404'd on me, which was confusing for a moment. Looks like putting them in code blocks would prevent it.
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#19Do these unikernel OSs tend to be language specific? Like if this app is written in x language, use y OS?
Yes, because they rely on the compiler (for a specific language) to build and deploy only what the application depends on.
The main examples I know of are Mirage (OCaml compiler) and IncludeOS (C++ compiler).
Though, I think there are experimental / research systems that try to understand a program composed of multiple languages that each compile to LLVM, or anything that compiles to JVM bytecode. So those might not be limited to a single language.
Re: IncludeOS – A minimal, resource efficient unikernel for cloud services
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jails and Zones did their jobs before LXC was a thing. The better technology doesn’t always win out — see Windows history.
Jails and Zones are inferior to Docker overall, the advantage of Docker is not the isolation technology but the whole workflow of using those containers.
Jails, maybe. Zones, definitely not.