Live data from Hacker News

Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

themiddlewareman.org

41–50 of 58 posts

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#41

> with Docker as a standard you will have a fully portable application that behaves exactly the same on one PaaS as it doesn’t on another I wish this lie would go away. You have plenty of dependencies with a Docker app and it's trivial to either be missing them or have conflicting ones. Go ahead and copy some binaries from one random Linux distro three years ago to one made today and see if they work every time; not…

Static linking. It works.

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#42
post #39

> with Docker as a standard you will have a fully portable application that behaves exactly the same on one PaaS as it doesn’t on another I wish this lie would go away. You have plenty of dependencies with a Docker app and it's trivial to either be missing them or have conflicting ones. Go ahead and copy some binaries from one random Linux distro three years ago to one made today and see if they work every time; not…

Hi, Evidently you don't feel the need for Docker and don't believe it's useful of needed, which is of course totally fine. I won't try to convince you since I've tried before and failed :) (if other are interested I cover some of the differences between docker and lxc here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17989306/what-does-docker... ) However there are obviously people who disagree with you and find that Docker s…

I can't make anyone's mind up for them. But if all they ever read are the hyperbolic marketing pieces about the glories of one tool, they're less likely to take the time to vet the claims and compare it to other tools.

There's a lot of people on HN, and many of them simply aren't familiar enough with technology not to buy into every product shilled in a blog post or news article. It's like the "HN effect" is convincing people that because it's on the front page, it's somehow intellectually stimulating, superior, or factually correct, when often this isn't the case. Luckily we have comments to put forth alternate views.

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#43
post #5

Does this force the other major PaaS providers like Heroku to support Docker? Seems like you'd need more providers on board for true portability. Awesome news though.

Heroku, being top dog of the PaaS market, doesn't really have a lot to gain from being able to migrate. Being a market leader, they're already the default for many projects; a standard, easily movable, container for applications would quickly strip away the value they can add to a project. A commodity PaaS deployment platform would quickly drive prices down to nearly bare-metal EC2 prices rather than the high markups that Heroku currently charges.

Redhat's in an interesting position here. They've got a lot of capital & a strong presence in the enterprise but OpenShift is still a minor player in the PaaS market. They have the resources & the credibility to push an open container & give it credibility while also being in a position to benefit financially from commodity containers - anyone that moves from Heroku to hosted OpenShift is a win for them as is any company that goes to RH for their own cloud.

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#44
post #33

Lol. Still a lot of people who think that Red Hat derivatives are the only "enterprise-grade" server distros. Ubuntu and Debian work great.

Many enterprises will only use RHEL (tooling, support, market maturity etc), hence 'enterprise-grade'.

...and enterprise software vendors (eg - Oracle) officially support their software running on RHEL. If you're paying 6 figures for a software license, the difference between APT and RPM fades quickly.

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#45
post #39

> with Docker as a standard you will have a fully portable application that behaves exactly the same on one PaaS as it doesn’t on another I wish this lie would go away. You have plenty of dependencies with a Docker app and it's trivial to either be missing them or have conflicting ones. Go ahead and copy some binaries from one random Linux distro three years ago to one made today and see if they work every time; not…

Hi, Evidently you don't feel the need for Docker and don't believe it's useful of needed, which is of course totally fine. I won't try to convince you since I've tried before and failed :) (if other are interested I cover some of the differences between docker and lxc here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17989306/what-does-docker... ) However there are obviously people who disagree with you and find that Docker s…

It seems peterwwillis picked up on one very specific claim (that Docker is a portable standard) and called it out as false. That's exactly what we should be doing with false marketing claims, or else we end up with MongoDB all over again.

If the two of you have a history, that's fine, but I think the OP made a fair comment, and you've attacked him personally rather than replying to the seemingly-valid point he made.

I think the answer is that Docker is in fact less portable than previous standards (e.g. bare disk VM images), but is potentially a lot more efficient (now that AuFS has been dumped). Is that correct?

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#46
post #4

I would very much like to use Docker/containers to provision and deploy my software stacks on a beefy server I have. The ideal for me would be a whole VM in a container (nginx/uwsgi/redis/postgres/etc), but Docker can't currently do that (it only runs a single process). Is there a practical/good way to easily do what I want, with Docker or another tool?

You should checkout ShipBuilder [1][2]. ShipBuilder is a freely available open-source self-hosted PaaS -- it aims to be an open clone of Heroku.

It uses Go, LXC, and HAProxy.

[1] https://github.com/sendhub/shipbuilder

[2] http://shipbuilder.io

Disclaimer: I am a committer on the project

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#47
post #4

I would very much like to use Docker/containers to provision and deploy my software stacks on a beefy server I have. The ideal for me would be a whole VM in a container (nginx/uwsgi/redis/postgres/etc), but Docker can't currently do that (it only runs a single process). Is there a practical/good way to easily do what I want, with Docker or another tool?

You should checkout ShipBuilder [1][2]. ShipBuilder is a freely available open-source self-hosted PaaS -- it aims to be an open clone of Heroku. It uses Go, LXC, and HAProxy. [1] https://github.com/sendhub/shipbuilder [2] http://shipbuilder.io Disclaimer: I am a committer on the project

Hmm, I had a look, but it's very light on documentation. So light, that it didn't really explain what the advantage is, or why I should try it, or how it works. (I tend to tune out the "open-source PaaS" offering because it's consistently been something too hard/heavy/weird to set up).

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#48
Actually myself, a combination of OpenVZ + prebuilt VMs for each of the OpenShift components needed, would be perfect.

Then I could run it on the free ProxMox, which has built in clustering for up to 16 hardware nodes.

Given how powerful today's servers are, and how much RAM they can hold, you could spend $200K on hardware(about $10K per server with 256GB RAM, plus Infiniband switches and cabling) and have an amazing PaaS setup to offer (or use for yourself).

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#49
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, Evidently you don't feel the need for Docker and don't believe it's useful of needed, which is of course totally fine. I won't try to convince you since I've tried before and failed :) (if other are interested I cover some of the differences between docker and lxc here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17989306/what-does-docker... ) However there are obviously people who disagree with you and find that Docker s…

I can't make anyone's mind up for them. But if all they ever read are the hyperbolic marketing pieces about the glories of one tool, they're less likely to take the time to vet the claims and compare it to other tools. There's a lot of people on HN, and many of them simply aren't familiar enough with technology not to buy into every product shilled in a blog post or news article. It's like the "HN effect" is convinci…

Your post assumes that every one of us on here is dumb and will fall victim to these "traps", lest we be saved by your brilliant opinions and revelatory messages (hyperbolic in their own way, ironically)..

Re: Docker + Red Hat OpenShift = The Tipping Point for Open PaaS?

#50
What I like about Docker is that if I have a production server build based on Centos 6.4 and use Docker to install tools x, y and z, then I can easily and quickly build a VM on my desktop with Virtualbox, install the base Centos 6.4, and run the Docker builds for tools x, y, and z. At that point I have a dev environment that is as close as you can reasonably get to the production server. This means that there will be fewer integration issues in QA and fewer release issues down the road. That is what Docker buys you. Anyone who has worked with Solaris containers will argue that there is fundamentally no difference, and they would be right. In addition, you could skip Docker and just use build scripts written in bash and get the same results, and that is also true. Docker is a small incremental improvement over these earlier solutions, but what matters is not size, but that it does improve the situation. The Dockerfile is cleaner and clearer than a bash script. The registry is already built for you https://github.com/dotcloud/docker-registry and the learning curve for new people is much reduced http://docs.docker.io/en/latest/

These are worthwhile improvements.

Post reply on HN