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

Red Hat Introduces Open Source Project Quay Container Registry

redhat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–106 of 106 posts

Re: Red Hat Introduces Open Source Project Quay Container Registry

#101

Post by thebouv »

johannkokos wrote: post #80
thebouv wrote: post #76

From the basic installation page: https://docs.projectquay.io/deploy_quay.html "For a Project Quay Registry installation (appropriate for non-production purposes), you need one system (physical or virtual machine) that has the following attributes: Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL): Obtain the latest Red Hat Enterprise Linux server media from the Downloads page and follow instructions from the Red Hat Enterprise Linux…

The RHEL version linked is 7.5, not 8.1. They might just forget to update the doc.

The docs right now refer to using `docker` as well, but `docker` isn't officially supported in RHEL 8+.

So guessing the docs will slowly shift to RHEL8 and podman.

Re: Red Hat Introduces Open Source Project Quay Container Registry

#102

Post by ecnahc515 »

throwaway9147 wrote: post #52
ecnahc515 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Openshift 4.x is open-source. I'm guessing what your speaking towards is the fact that there is no prebuilt distribution of it that doesn't require a subscription, ie: OKD, which is something being worked on. Clayon started off the conversation on this back in June: https://lists.openshift.redhat.com/openshift-archives/users/... But everything it's being built with is entirely FOSS. Making OKD happen is a high priori…

> Openshift 4.x is open-source. That's great to hear. My mistake then, last time I've opened http://github.com/openshift/origin , I saw OpenShift 3.11 even though latest release was 4.2 at the time. From that, and given the fact that all other RedHat products are upstream first, I've made a conclusion that OpenShift 4 is no longer open-source. > From my understanding, most of it's been blocked on Fedora CoreOS being…

Clayton already answered some of this, but I also have some other ways of saying the same thing.

OKD 4 uses Fedora CoreOS for the same reason that OKD 3.11 used CentOS instead of RHEL. For better or worse, they're built and maintained by different systems and/or people, and we simply can't just make OKD use a RHEL derivative due to how support and subscriptions work.

Functionally, they should be nearly identical, but in practice, they're two different pieces of software and they're maintained and built in different systems, much like how Fedora, and CentOS are managed separately from RHEL. The differences mostly come to where packages come from and what systems built them.

The code for OCP/OKD is the same, the major difference is how it's built and released and the OS (RHEL CoreOS vs Fedora CoreOS), and potentially the upgrade graphs supported via over the air updates.

As to who Clayton is: he is basically one of the the main architects for Openshift since basically the beginning (I forget if it goes back to prior to v3).

Re: Red Hat Introduces Open Source Project Quay Container Registry

#103

Post by ecnahc515 »

Havoc wrote: post #71
slenk wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4gb from linode is $20/month. Not bad if you can actually get use. If you want to just test it, why not use a VritualBox VM or similar?

Without getting all SJW on you I think it's important to highlight that 20 USD/pm is still quite a lot to most people. To illustrate: My employer gives me $150 cloud credits. 20 USD seems like pocket change Me paying out of pocket...20 that's like 2x netflix but fine whatever. Me being part of the other 95% of the world...unaffordable. But really my main objection here is why. To borrow my gitlab example...how does a…

Well the language choice does make a big difference.

Python has the GIL meaning parallelism comes at the cost of increased memory and CPU consumption because it's typically going to spin up multiple copies of the Python interpreter and your application. This is also true of Ruby, so it applies both to Gitlab and Quay.

Quay uses Gunicorn which uses pre-fork model which means spinning up multiple processes of Quay which can lead to increased CPU and memory requirements. Obviously you need multiple cores to take proper advantage of multiple processes, and multiple processes each result in multiple copies of the same application running, thus more memory.

This is kind of a fact of using something like Python or Ruby unless you design your application to use an event driven architecture with something like twisted, tulip, async, tornado, etc. Even then, unless you have async versions of the libraries your using (eg: your DB driver) that won't necessarily remove your need for multiple processes.

Re: Red Hat Introduces Open Source Project Quay Container Registry

#104

Post by smarterclayton »

ibotty wrote: post #93
smarterclayton wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We needed fedora coreos. OpenShift used RHEL CoreOS. It took longer for fedora coreos because we also wanted fedora coreos to be a sufficient replacement for ContainerLinux. That integration started passing CI with openshift today. Readme updates and lots of this stuff need to be done - we left the readme at 3.11 because that was a coherent install (vs the more work in progress of fedora coreos). Every bit of source…

Is there already some documentation on how to play with it?

Coming very soon - hopefully ready for KubeCon

Re: Red Hat Introduces Open Source Project Quay Container Registry

#105

Post by polynomial »

moondev wrote: post #87
heavyset_go wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, this prereqs are about what you could get on a netbook in 2012 and on a modern day cell phone. High resource requirements mean that I need to spend more on compute, whether that means paying a cloud provider for a beefier instance, or spending more money on hardware and electricity.

2C/4G is hardly "beefy". If that is too much to run then use the quay.io service and not worry about self hosting your registry?

"640 kB ought to be enough for anybody"

(yes, that was in reference to a PC, not a server.)

Re: Red Hat Introduces Open Source Project Quay Container Registry

#106

Post by polynomial »

freedomben wrote: post #24
SEJeff wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once of the nicer features is that they offer an "encrypted password" where you login to quay and click the "generate encrypted password" option in your user preferences. Then instead of hardcoding your plaintext password into your docker config json, it puts the encrypted password that is only applicable to quay. For those that use LDAP authentication for this, it makes is a much smaller attack vector. The per-team…

Quay also integrates very well with OpenShift. It works fine stand-alone too, but if you're already using OpenShift it's worth looking into.

Quay supports Podman & rkt, not just Docker images.
Post reply on HN