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

Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

azure.microsoft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 148 posts

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#121

Post by rsync »

kolencherry wrote: post #14
bydo wrote: post #11

Pardon the skepticism, but do "Hyper-V Containers" with "enhanced isolation powered by Hyper-V virtualization" sound suspiciously like, err, Hyper-V virtual machines? And "Server Nano" has a description rather reminiscent of 2008's "Server Core". Is this just about management tools? Because that's cool, too, but why the spin?

From the TechNet Announcement: "we removed the GUI stack, 32 bit support (WOW64), MSI and a number of default Server Core components. There is no local logon or Remote Desktop support. All management is performed remotely via WMI and PowerShell. We are also adding Windows Server Roles and Features using Features on Demand and DISM. We are improving remote manageability via PowerShell with Desired State Configuration…

"we removed the GUI stack, 32 bit support (WOW64), MSI and a number of default Server Core components. There is no local logon or Remote Desktop support. All management is performed remotely via WMI and PowerShell."

Is this unprecedented ? I think it is, but I've been divorced from the windows ecosystem for a very, very long time ...

Is this, in fact, the first time that there has been a Windows release that had ... no windows ? Had no GUI ? Was administered with a CLI only ?

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#122

Post by hueving »

emodendroket wrote: post #60
alttab wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine what switching to linux could do for you.

http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2006/03/22/55800... > In particular, if the solution begins with "First, install..." you've pretty much lost out of the gate. Solving a five-minute problem by taking a half hour to download and install a program is a net loss. In a corporate environment, adding a program to a deployment is extraordinarily expensive. You have to work with your company's legal team to make su…

The fud from Microsoft is interesting. They imply that by using open source, you can't get support for when you're company is losing money. Additionally, they imply that by using Microsoft, they will actually do something useful in this contrived situation losing thousands per day.

Here's a hint, whichever solution is more complex is going to bite much harder from a downtime perspective, regardless of the underlying technology. I would much rather depend on a few line script that uses sendmail rather than a 5,000 mail client half implemented in a batch script.

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#123

Post by rsync »

binarycrusader wrote: post #63
chatmasta wrote: post #47

THE STORY OF THE CONTAINER GOLDRUSH As seen by a verbose, presumptuous 22 year old. OPEN SOURCE MOVEMENT lays foundation for containerization: - linux kernel gains mainstream adoption, becomes standardized across distributions - kernel matures to support containerization (i.e., namespacing critical OS operations) - lxc project takes advantage of kernel support, builds tooling around namespace containerization DOCKER…

You forgot the part where Solaris did containers first in 2005. Others "realised" the value of this later and started improving upon the ideas contained within. Although I'm sure many might argue that this is the natural conclusion of virtualization.

"You forgot the part where Solaris did containers first in 2005."

FreeBSD jail in 2000.

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#124

Post by rsync »

binarycrusader wrote: post #72
bydo wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And where FreeBSD did jails in 2000 (or actually a bit earlier). https://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.0R/notes.html

Yes, everyone refers to jails, but I think most people would agree that jails weren't really containers. They didn't provide true isolation for a set of applications. I guess you could argue they were the original prototype for them though. Solaris containers are the first "lightweight virtualization" technology that I'm personally aware of that provided true isolation of one more processes from the host operating sy…

"Yes, everyone refers to jails, but I think most people would agree that jails weren't really containers. They didn't provide true isolation for a set of applications. I guess you could argue they were the original prototype for them though."

The first VPS provider (JohnCompanies, 2001) was based entirely on jail and it absolutely provided (even then) true isolation for a set of applications.

Every customer had their own unix root and their own rc.conf configured their own system and everyone ran their own sendmail/named/httpd/etc.

It is absolutely correct to refer to jails in this way, and that is why you see everyone doing it.

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#125

Post by takeda »

binarycrusader wrote: post #63
chatmasta wrote: post #47

THE STORY OF THE CONTAINER GOLDRUSH As seen by a verbose, presumptuous 22 year old. OPEN SOURCE MOVEMENT lays foundation for containerization: - linux kernel gains mainstream adoption, becomes standardized across distributions - kernel matures to support containerization (i.e., namespacing critical OS operations) - lxc project takes advantage of kernel support, builds tooling around namespace containerization DOCKER…

You forgot the part where Solaris did containers first in 2005. Others "realised" the value of this later and started improving upon the ideas contained within. Although I'm sure many might argue that this is the natural conclusion of virtualization.

You forgot the part where FreeBSD 4.0 added jails in March 2000 [1].

You could argue that jails were inspired by chroot(), and that's correct, but that's hardly any isolation.

[1] http://phk.freebsd.dk/pubs/sane2000-jail.pdf

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#126

Post by jamra »

ochoseis wrote: post #26
kolencherry wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the TechNet Announcement: "we removed the GUI stack, 32 bit support (WOW64), MSI and a number of default Server Core components. There is no local logon or Remote Desktop support. All management is performed remotely via WMI and PowerShell. We are also adding Windows Server Roles and Features using Features on Demand and DISM. We are improving remote manageability via PowerShell with Desired State Configuration…

Since this is all remote powershell, it would be nice if MS/Windows introduced a native SSH server. That would probably help drive some conversion for people used to the posix world.

I think with Azure, you can log into your Azure instance and then send commands. I recently tried to set up automated deployments for our non-Azure infrastructure and investigated bringing things to Azure.

It's not the same as SSH, but then again powershell is not the same as linux shells.

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#127

Post by reitanqild »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #81
dikaiosune wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found that building fat JARs with all dependencies bundled solves a lot of the same dependency management issues containers can be used for. And it does it without container overhead.

How do you apply security updates to the dependencies?

To update on this since I am a Java programmer who is picking up c again after 10 years:

In modern Java world people often maven or another project tool where upgrading a library is as simple as changing the version number in a "pom" file, push and wait for Jenkins to finish build, unit and integration tests.

Not kidding here, this is one of the things I love about Java development.

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#128

Post by static_noise »

kirinan wrote: post #7

This will be what takes containers into the mainstream businesses. Companies may adopt docker or other instead of this, but Microsoft creating their own version of it means its a viable technology. Im more interested in the new frameworks and technologies that get adopted because of this than the fact that its in use. Traditional Java web projects that are hosted on Tomcat/JBoss don't run well inside containers but t…

> ...Microsoft creating their own version of it means its a viable technology.

...Microsoft creating their own version of it means it's _viewed_ as a viable technology by _managers_.

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#129

Post by dordoka »

dikaiosune wrote: post #45
dordoka wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks a lot for your answer. We create a separate container for each application, as it seemed like the correct approach. In our company we do have several "levels" of library (even jvm) version requirements. Containers have been very helpful to easy the pain that was managing that on the server side.

I've found that building fat JARs with all dependencies bundled solves a lot of the same dependency management issues containers can be used for. And it does it without container overhead.

That's what we do now: fat JARs, including all dependencies and use embedded app server. On top of that, we use docker containers so we can control de JVM version as well. The overhead is not that high and it gives us the benefit of knowing that the same container that the developer/jenkins tested is the one that passed QA and will run in production.

Re: Microsoft announces Hyper-V Containers

#130

Post by wila »

rsync wrote: post #121
kolencherry wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the TechNet Announcement: "we removed the GUI stack, 32 bit support (WOW64), MSI and a number of default Server Core components. There is no local logon or Remote Desktop support. All management is performed remotely via WMI and PowerShell. We are also adding Windows Server Roles and Features using Features on Demand and DISM. We are improving remote manageability via PowerShell with Desired State Configuration…

"we removed the GUI stack, 32 bit support (WOW64), MSI and a number of default Server Core components. There is no local logon or Remote Desktop support. All management is performed remotely via WMI and PowerShell." Is this unprecedented ? I think it is, but I've been divorced from the windows ecosystem for a very, very long time ... Is this, in fact, the first time that there has been a Windows release that had ...…

Not really the first time. Windows Server Core has existed since Windows Server 2008 [1]. Sounds like they stripped some more parts like MSI and 32 bits support.

[1] https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd184075.aspx

Post reply on HN