All I want is a process that can be frozen and copied to multiple servers. start/stop is merely a state change.
DMTCP (Distributed MultiThreaded Checkpointing)
Dissatisfied with Docker
31–40 of 229 posts
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#32Do BSD jails solve these problems? The little i know of them, they are good at containerization but don't solve the distribution problem that docker containers do.
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#33These are real problems with docker, but do we wanna talk about docker for Mac? A total performance disaster. https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Ao...
I have no idea how, but Docker for Mac was taking up a whopping 65GB of space in one of the cache folders in ~/Library, although I had uninstalled it months ago. I wish I had taken a screenshot, but I was honestly dumbfounded. I had used it maybe once, ever. EDIT: It turns out I’m not making this up/an edge case, at least 940 people have run into this too: https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/371
I have that problem too. Solution seemed to be to set up an alias to clean out old images, volumes, etc and run that every so often
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#34I just want to be able to save a container binary to a USB drive and then run it from a different computer without having to install anything.
I believe that already exist and is called "AppImage".
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#35These are real problems with docker, but do we wanna talk about docker for Mac? A total performance disaster. https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Ao...
I hate how the Docker team called it native. Docker for Mac/Windows still run in a hypervisor because so much of Docker is specific to Linux/cgroups. There was a FreeBSD port of Docker that attempted to implement a lot of the Docker API using zfs+jails but it went unmaintained and was never ported to the newer modular Docker implementation. You're always going to get that performance hit with the hypervisor layer the…
> Docker for Mac/Windows still run in a hypervisor because so much of Docker is specific to Linux/cgroups.
As I understand it, that what you describe is true of Docker for Mac, but not Docker for Windows which uses Windows' built-in container support (analogous to cgroups).
https://stefanscherer.github.io/how-to-run-lightweight-windo...
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#36I am currently on this train. Having used rkt in the past, I went to revisit it recently only to find this: https://www.cncf.io/blog/2019/08/16/cncf-archives-the-rkt-pr... I am so extremely disappointed in the CNCF as rkt (at the time, at least) seemed to be more "production ready" than Docker. Are there any real alternatives? Is the answer "find something else that uses containerd in a more friendly way?" Is the ans…
Podman looks interesting at a quick glance, though not supporting docker-compose makes migrating nontrivial for us.
and my attempt to get it run on mac were fruitless. I would have to do it in a Vagrant VM like 5 years ago.
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#37I've been using Docker since 2015ish and the container start up / stop speed is really the only thing that bugs me.
Everything else is fine for day to day usage IMO (on Windows and Linux at least) and very much worth the trade offs, but having to wait multiple seconds for your app to start is tedious since it plays such a heavy role in both development and even in production. Each second your app is not running is downtime, assuming you're not load balanced.
I opened an issue for this almost a year ago but not too much has come from it other than identifying there was maybe a regression in recent'ish versions: https://github.com/moby/moby/issues/38077
We're talking multiple seconds in Docker vs ~150ms as a regular process to start up a typical web app process like gunicorn in a decently sized Flask app (many thousands of lines of code, lots of dependencies -- a real world app).
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#38I'm newer to the Docker scene but haven't really found any of the complaints in this article realized in my work. Faster speed would be nice but I don't really mind it now. I see a lot of complaints about the docker daemon and root privileges on HN and I've tried to understand where they are coming from but I can't get anywhere. For instance, I understand the reasoning behind "if there is no need for a daemon there s…
It would be faster. I also don’t really care if a container take 2 seconds or 100ms to start... but building docker images is painfully slow. I’ve also ended up (numerous times) with the “docker daemon is borked” situation, which requires a restart to fix... and you can imagine how that sucks on a prod or multi tenant systems.
One reason we care about containers taking seconds to start is that our CI tests have to start and stop a lot of containers, and it all adds up. And running them in parallel wouldn't help because they would just bottleneck on the global docker daemon... or break entirely by interfering with each other, unless we run multiple Docker-in-Docker setups, which would be even more painful and add its own overhead.
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#39The article is completely on point. Because of all the reasons exposed there (and a few more) I started Wasmer, a new container system based on WebAssembly - https://wasmer.io/ Here are some advantages of Wasmer vs Docker: * Much faster startup time * Smaller containers * OS independent containers (they can run in Linux, macOS and Windows) * Chipset independent containers (so they can run anywhere: x86_64, Aarch64/AR…
Is there a feature by feature comparison of wasmer to docker? I don't think Wasmer, while interesting, is a container system. It looks more like a bytecode vm.
Things I use and love from docker that to me feel "container"-y:
1. OSs as a library (FROM alpine:3.9)
2. Network namespaces so all applications think they are running on a machine with port 80 available
3. Service discovery through DNS
4. CPU and memory share allocation
5. Volumes (bind, temporary, remote)
6. docker-compose for single-command & single-tool development environments (all you need is docker and an internet connection)
Re: Dissatisfied with Docker
#40I just want to be able to save a container binary to a USB drive and then run it from a different computer without having to install anything.
There are a number of ways to get this kind of functionality. Can you expound on "different computer"?
What part of "different computer" is confusing to you?