91–100 of 116 posts
I never understood why people use Docker. QEMU exists
Apples and oranges. Containers aren’t VMs.
I never understood why people use Docker. QEMU exists
Whether it was luck or hard facts, Docker became the standard and default nearly to a point where juniors only knowing how to program a "Hello World!" webservice will dockerize it. It's an ubiquitous technical skill like basic SQL. As someone who has very low interest in container technology itself, I have zero reason to inform myself about QUEMU..
None of this is simple. We're drowning in YAML files. It's difficult to maintain. Jinja + ansible + helm... it's a joke. There must be a better way of doing all this.
Then you'd have your own NoCode startup generator
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real problem is, people are deploying dozens of different coding languages, any technology that whimsically passes by, and replacing simple, streamlined monolith technology with 100 micro services. All of this is endlessly pushed by AWS, Google, Docker, and anyone else with a foot in the "Snag as much cash from DEVs" crowd. Other old timers will explain how they ran thousands of hits/second on 6 or 7 bare metal s…
Docker images are just lighter weight VMs. Or to be more accurate, they accomplish the same goals as full VMs in a different way. If you're running Docker in a VM on a bare metal server you're doing it wrong. You should be running Docker on a bare metal server. You're also conflating different problems here. If someone is writing poor SQL it doesn't matter if their deploying with a VM, Docker, or onto a bare metal se…
They are explicitly not that. Docker containers do not provide you any real isolation guarantees from a security POV and make no attempts at such. This is extensively documented. [1]
"If you're running Docker in a VM on a bare metal server you're doing it wrong. "
Ummm... Running Docker inside a VM is by far the most common deployment type of Docker there is. What do you think is an EC2/ECS/GKE deployment? Hint, there's a VM running your containers in all of them. This is also what Docker the company recommends - https://www.docker.com/blog/containers-and-vms-together/
[1]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/windowsconta... https://www.redhat.com/en/topics/containers/containers-vs-vm...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I question this logic - there seem to be fundamental differences in even the basic services between various cloud providers. For example you can resize a compute-attached disk size live in GCP while you can't in AWS. Many intricacies like this are annoying, but at the same time advantageous if you know and use them. If you are primarily trying to just offer another layer on top of these cloud services, (like snowflak…
Not the person you are replying too but some industries have regulatory mandates for vendor diversity in cases like this. In addition, when your bills get to millions per month, the provider supplies quite a bit of TAMs and technical resources to your account. This can be helpful, but they also get a good understanding of where you are and are not in a position to dip out if things get sideways in billing. (Also, oth…
Have you been part of an integration with a health care system? They are so tightly locked in to their existing EMR/EHR system it would make you cry. Every third party vendor that comes along has to integrate with it.
Part of the work I did at the company that I mentioned where I was a dev lead involved migrating our company from Workday. Their entire process was integrated into it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can create/resize/delete non-root EBS volumes without any downtime of the attached host(s), as far as I'm aware? Pretty sure I've done so in the past. You'll have to resize2fs or whatever but it shouldn't take any downtime.
EBS is not "compute-attached". GP means the disks that appear to be local to the instance.
EBS “appears to be local” but it is actually networked attached storage. Instance storage (is that the correct name?) is where the VM and the storage are on the same physical server and it should be faster.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The real problem is, people are deploying dozens of different coding languages, any technology that whimsically passes by, and replacing simple, streamlined monolith technology with 100 micro services. All of this is endlessly pushed by AWS, Google, Docker, and anyone else with a foot in the "Snag as much cash from DEVs" crowd. Other old timers will explain how they ran thousands of hits/second on 6 or 7 bare metal s…
Docker images are just lighter weight VMs. Or to be more accurate, they accomplish the same goals as full VMs in a different way. If you're running Docker in a VM on a bare metal server you're doing it wrong. You should be running Docker on a bare metal server. You're also conflating different problems here. If someone is writing poor SQL it doesn't matter if their deploying with a VM, Docker, or onto a bare metal se…
They are related, as devs sometimes think of microservices as a way to speed things up and/or process more requests per second, under an assumption that a server with fewer responsibilities is a server with faster turnaround time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AWS in theory has a product called service catalog that fills this role. It's not super fun. Or at least my interactions with havn't been so great. Good luck.
Thanks! We've released an alpha version, with only one architecture, some days ago. If you want to learn more, I've written a blog post: https://medium.com/revolv2/im-building-revolv-to-automate-cl...