31–40 of 109 posts
Containers won dev mindshare because of ease packaging and distribution of the artifacts. Somehow it is Docker, not VM vendors came up with a standard for packaging, distributing and indexing for glorified tarballs and it quickly picked up.
I believe, that success of containers is not because of lightweightness or other isolation properties of them. Containers won dev mindshare because of ease packaging and distribution of the artifacts. Somehow it is Docker, not VM vendors came up with a standard for packaging, distributing and indexing for glorified tarballs and it quickly picked up.
Calling container images glorified tarballs is like calling cars glorified lawnmowers.
I believe, that success of containers is not because of lightweightness or other isolation properties of them. Containers won dev mindshare because of ease packaging and distribution of the artifacts. Somehow it is Docker, not VM vendors came up with a standard for packaging, distributing and indexing for glorified tarballs and it quickly picked up.
> glorified tarballs Calling container images glorified tarballs is like calling cars glorified lawnmowers.
That's a valid way to look at it, but there are other ways. Containers are also a simple, practical way to bundle applications and their dependencies in a relatively standardized way, so they can be run on different compute fabrics. That sense of the term isn't loaded with any specific notion of how attack surfaces should work. I think modern "Docker"'s security properties are underrated†. But you still can't run mul…
> Containers are also a simple, practical way to bundle applications and their dependencies in a relatively standardized way, so they can be run on different compute fabrics. What I find interesting, is that many uses of containers are just reinventing statically linked binaries in a more complicated form.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Containers are also a simple, practical way to bundle applications and their dependencies in a relatively standardized way, so they can be run on different compute fabrics. What I find interesting, is that many uses of containers are just reinventing statically linked binaries in a more complicated form.
If it was just a replacement for statically linked binaries, I’d be less concerned. In reality people stuff EVERYTHING in into containers, database, queue, a webserver and your application, it all goes into one container.
That's simply doing it wrong! If people are doing this, you can't point to containers as the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Containers are also a simple, practical way to bundle applications and their dependencies in a relatively standardized way, so they can be run on different compute fabrics. What I find interesting, is that many uses of containers are just reinventing statically linked binaries in a more complicated form.
If it was just a replacement for statically linked binaries, I’d be less concerned. In reality people stuff EVERYTHING in into containers, database, queue, a webserver and your application, it all goes into one container.
I believe, that success of containers is not because of lightweightness or other isolation properties of them. Containers won dev mindshare because of ease packaging and distribution of the artifacts. Somehow it is Docker, not VM vendors came up with a standard for packaging, distributing and indexing for glorified tarballs and it quickly picked up.
> glorified tarballs Calling container images glorified tarballs is like calling cars glorified lawnmowers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it was just a replacement for statically linked binaries, I’d be less concerned. In reality people stuff EVERYTHING in into containers, database, queue, a webserver and your application, it all goes into one container.
I thought one of the first rules was one container per app/service/whatever.
There is nothing enforcing the mapping of one container to one service so people will have multiple if they find it convenient, or sometimes if they simply don't know the "rule".
A lot of people use containers as light weight VMs. Some use them as not so light VMs, in fact. In that case multiple services in one is practically expected.
Marketing. Because of Marketing.