Docker Considered Harmful (2016) • Hacker News Board

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#171

Post by brightball » Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 2:00 PM UTC

WhitneyLand wrote: post #147

brightball wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (And if the relationship between development and ops has broken down to the point that each one is trying to work around rather than with each other, you're already screwed. The rest is just details.) IMO 90% boils down to that, regardless of what technology one side or other wants to use. If Ops is trying to push Dev to use a particular technology or vice versa. This happens whether you're talking Docker or a part…

>>Either side will see their preference as...doing their job And in your example they’d both be wrong. Such folks shouldn’t spend as much time worrying about their job description as about what will make the company successful? . Companies don’t become great by everyone waiting around for only managers to decide when new roles or practices should come online. Employees at any level are allowed to consider the big pic…

Totally agree.

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#172

Post by mbu » Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 2:03 PM UTC

true_tuna wrote: post #85

andrewguenther wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three years in and this hasn't happened. Our dev team also does ops and we've found that Docker has improved things markedly. But feel free to keep spreading your FUD.

I’d love for this to be true. Have you had anyone come in and do an audit? I find crazy stuff when I show up at No Ops shops and poke around.

Can you expand on the crazy stuff you've seen?

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#173

Post by philwelch » Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 4:21 PM UTC

rpcope1 wrote: post #153

shaklee3 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this mean? Docker does not run a VM. It runs cgroups, namespaces, etc.

Inside of Linux, yes Docker does utilize cgroups, namespaces and some other stuff for isolation. However, the GP is almost certainly talking about "Docker for Windows" and "Docker for OS X", which do not run directly on the host OS, and need to be run inside of Linux VMs (like Vagrant).

aye

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#174

Post by 0x7f800000 » Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 4:30 PM UTC

There are two certainties in software development:

0. A new technology will arise and it will be named 'X'

1. Eventually someone will write an article titled 'X Considered Harmful'

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#175

Post by w8rbt » Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 6:33 PM UTC

workinthehead wrote: post #141

w8rbt wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AWS Fargate. No infrastructure to patch or worry with. Just code and Dockerfiles.

You run your containers on a hypothetical platform that hasn't been released?

You are misinformed. Fargate is out and it works. I have containers running on it right now and they have been for several weeks now. You can select it or the old EC2 approach. Try it, you may like it.

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#176

Post by mdekkers » Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 9:12 PM UTC

koffiezet wrote: post #170

40four wrote: post #146

Plus one for the scathing and unapologetic criticism of Docker. I'm admitedly pretty inexperienced with Docker, but I feel like everything I've read on it seems to have virtually nothing bad to say about it, so it's nice to hear an opposing opinion. That being said, this also feels like a "Get off my lawn" type of rant from an experienced devoloper who is stuck in their ways, and/or has a little bit too big of an ego…

> Maybe Docker is just reinventing the wheel... Docker is way more than that, and he's completely ignoring the bigger picture, and many people seem to be missing that. It's importance is not limited to "my little server" - it's the concepts that matter - not the technological details. Docker standardised a set of concepts, which have been adopted at a rapid pace for a reason. It's no accident big corporations like Re…

It's no accident big corporations like RedHat Google, Microsoft, Amazon are jumping on Kubernetes (which uses the docker concepts, and massively extends them), for cloud deployments, it's the future.

Do you know the history of Kubernetes? And really, Kubernetes uses "Docker Concepts"?

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#177

Post by mdekkers » Tue, Jun 26, 2018, 9:15 PM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #24

Docker by itself probably doesn't make any sense to an engineer until they get a chance to see kubernetes in action. There is nothing more awesome than seeing, on the fly, your worker pool being scaled out by 100x by nothing more than kubectl --context k8s-uw1a-gcp -n customerx scale deploy someapp_worker --replicas 100 to make you appreciate what docker can do for you.

There is nothing more awesome than seeing, on the fly, your worker pool being scaled out by 100x

This was possible, and done, long before kubernetes or docker. The frequent counter-argument I hear is that "kubernetes makes it easy" - which is often espoused by people that don't have to build or manage kubernetes in prod.

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#178

Post by 40four » Wed, Jun 27, 2018, 2:49 AM UTC

koffiezet wrote: post #170

40four wrote: post #146

Plus one for the scathing and unapologetic criticism of Docker. I'm admitedly pretty inexperienced with Docker, but I feel like everything I've read on it seems to have virtually nothing bad to say about it, so it's nice to hear an opposing opinion. That being said, this also feels like a "Get off my lawn" type of rant from an experienced devoloper who is stuck in their ways, and/or has a little bit too big of an ego…

> Maybe Docker is just reinventing the wheel... Docker is way more than that, and he's completely ignoring the bigger picture, and many people seem to be missing that. It's importance is not limited to "my little server" - it's the concepts that matter - not the technological details. Docker standardised a set of concepts, which have been adopted at a rapid pace for a reason. It's no accident big corporations like Re…

Awesome! Thanks for the feedback. My company just took over a project for a client, and the previous team used Docker, so I will be getting my hands dirty in the new code base very soon. I know the skepticism from developer you mentioned. I know a bunch of guys of that mindset. They want to do EVERYRHING by hand, so they can have "complete control" of everything, or something like that. While I find this admirable, I do not subscribe to this. I just want to develop. The more time & energy I can spend on being creative and building new things the better. I will be happy to let Docker do some heavy lifting for me, and free up hours I would have spent on configuration/ setup, or reading documentation/ stack overflow.

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#179

Post by zapita » Wed, Jun 27, 2018, 8:11 AM UTC

paulie_a wrote: post #134

zapita wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vagrant runs a VM per app . Sometimes more. Big difference.

Since when? I run multiple apps on vagrant every day. That is pretty standard.

And most likely you are running those multiple apps on multiple VMs.

Re: Docker Considered Harmful (2016)

#180

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Jun 27, 2018, 9:14 AM UTC

kenforthewin wrote: post #13

Aside from being a bad argument for the reasons already listed, I'm honestly getting tired of the "X considered harmful" meme, when the author never actually makes an argument that docker is harmful, only superfluous.

[deleted]