This destroys heroku, right?
No, I think deis and dokku
AWS EC2 Container Service
51–60 of 90 posts
Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#52"All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection" - David Wheeler That's what "containers" are, of course. There's so much state in OS file namespaces that running any complex program requires "installation" first. That's such a mess that virtual machines were created to allow a custom OS environment for a program. Then that turned into a mess, with, for example, a large number of canne…
IMO, the problem is that your standard OS has way too much stuff running.
A SaaS app running in production should be about the size of your binary, and the libraries it uses. Instead, we have X, smtp, terminals and a full filesystem running. home directories and uids make no sense in an app that uses no unix users except for the one you're forced to use.
I'd really like to see a much smaller, simpler, non-posix OS for running server apps.
Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#53Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
These are also properties of Google Container Engine. Which other container service offerings were you thinking of?
Digital Ocean has something called "Private Networking" that's internal to the data center but shared with all other customers. It's not obvious from reading the website that this is the case.
I actually think they're almost intentionally a touch deceptive. "Private" is a really loaded term to use there.
Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#55Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#56Is anyone else seeing a blank confirmation page when trying to sign up? http://i.imgur.com/faztegP.png
I got that too. Pretty awesome. May not be production ready for quite some time...
Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#57"All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection" - David Wheeler That's what "containers" are, of course. There's so much state in OS file namespaces that running any complex program requires "installation" first. That's such a mess that virtual machines were created to allow a custom OS environment for a program. Then that turned into a mess, with, for example, a large number of canne…
In this case, the problem isn't being solved -- solving the problem would mean moving away from dependencies on the global OS namespace by relearning how to write self-contained applications (some people never forgot). Containers are just a big wad of duct tape holding together the ball of mud that comprises most web applications' server-side components. Add containers, and you haven't solved the problem, you've just…
Functions are just a big wad of duct tape holding together the ball of mud that comprises most applications' lines of code. Add functions, and you haven't solved the problem, you've just made two problems.
Does this sound true to you? What makes containers any different from the organization that the abstraction of "functions" bring to ordinary sequential programs?
Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case, the problem isn't being solved -- solving the problem would mean moving away from dependencies on the global OS namespace by relearning how to write self-contained applications (some people never forgot). Containers are just a big wad of duct tape holding together the ball of mud that comprises most web applications' server-side components. Add containers, and you haven't solved the problem, you've just…
Functions are just a big wad of duct tape holding together the ball of mud that comprises most applications' lines of code. Add functions, and you haven't solved the problem, you've just made two problems. Does this sound true to you? What makes containers any different from the organization that the abstraction of "functions" bring to ordinary sequential programs?
Containers abstract over reducible complexity.
Functions (should) abstract over irreducible complexity.
As long as we're asking hypotheticals — why do applications need to control the global OS namespace and the dependencies between elements in that namespace to a degree that the applications themselves can't be easily deployed without containers?
Can that problem be reduced?
If not, why not?
Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#59"All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection" - David Wheeler That's what "containers" are, of course. There's so much state in OS file namespaces that running any complex program requires "installation" first. That's such a mess that virtual machines were created to allow a custom OS environment for a program. Then that turned into a mess, with, for example, a large number of canne…
IMO, the problem is that your standard OS has way too much stuff running. A SaaS app running in production should be about the size of your binary, and the libraries it uses. Instead, we have X, smtp, terminals and a full filesystem running. home directories and uids make no sense in an app that uses no unix users except for the one you're forced to use. I'd really like to see a much smaller, simpler, non-posix OS fo…
I haven't had a chance to play with it, but I ran across this project the other day: https://github.com/cloudius-systems/osv
"OSv was designed from the ground up to execute a single application on top of a hypervisor... OSv... runs unmodified Linux applications (most of Linux's ABI is supported) and in particular can run an unmodified JVM, and applications built on top of one."
Re: AWS EC2 Container Service
#60"All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection" - David Wheeler That's what "containers" are, of course. There's so much state in OS file namespaces that running any complex program requires "installation" first. That's such a mess that virtual machines were created to allow a custom OS environment for a program. Then that turned into a mess, with, for example, a large number of canne…
In this case, the problem isn't being solved -- solving the problem would mean moving away from dependencies on the global OS namespace by relearning how to write self-contained applications (some people never forgot). Containers are just a big wad of duct tape holding together the ball of mud that comprises most web applications' server-side components. Add containers, and you haven't solved the problem, you've just…
It's great for those nasty legacy apps that only work on old unmaintained versions of Rails or old OS Versions etc.
Take all the nastiness and throw it into a box, without needing to contact Ops to reserve memory and provision a VM.
IMO, it's one of the major reasons why Enterprises get so excited about Docker. Legacy app dependency issues are horrible once you get past a certain scale.
VM's are expensive and non-self-service at most orgs since they tie up RAM and licenses.