Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Container Registry

cloud.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 34 posts

Re: Google Container Registry

#2

Post by soccerdave »

I really expected for Amazon to release a Container Registry before they took the preview status off ECS. Looks like Google beat them to the punch. I'd still be very interested to see if Amazon will release something soon.

Re: Google Container Registry

#3

Post by notatoad »

>Pricing

>During the beta period you will be charged only for the Google Cloud Storage storage and network egress consumed by your Docker images.

Dammit google, this is not how you price things. Especially when people have been burned by price jumps on your service before. I don't know why i'd bother integrating with a service when I have no idea what the cost will be.

Re: Google Container Registry

#4

Post by istvan__ »

soccerdave wrote: post #2

I really expected for Amazon to release a Container Registry before they took the preview status off ECS. Looks like Google beat them to the punch. I'd still be very interested to see if Amazon will release something soon.

Yes a little bit of competition in the container registry space would be good for everybody. I need to have a closer look how good is this Google offering. One problem that we run into was security when started to use Docker. The management did not want to upload the images to any cloud provider, so we were forced to create a registry in our infrastructure. For this use case Registry 2.0 is going to be a better option.

http://blog.docker.com/2015/04/faster-and-better-image-distr...

Re: Google Container Registry

#6

Post by dragonwriter »

notatoad wrote: post #3

>Pricing >During the beta period you will be charged only for the Google Cloud Storage storage and network egress consumed by your Docker images. Dammit google, this is not how you price things. Especially when people have been burned by price jumps on your service before. I don't know why i'd bother integrating with a service when I have no idea what the cost will be.

> Dammit google, this is not how you price things.

It actually is the way Google quite often prices things.

> I don't know why i'd bother integrating with a service when I have no idea what the cost will be.

Then maybe a pre-release service for which Google has not yet developed the experience with usage patterns that will let it price the service appropriately isn't for you. But that's okay, its not intended for everybody -- even everybody for whom the service would be appropriate when GA -- hence the Beta label.

Re: Google Container Registry

#8

Post by derefr »

smrtinsert wrote: post #7

Aweosme, I can't wait till they pull the plug out from under me.

I imagine that wouldn't be very likely in this case—this is much less like Google's usual "let's build some random thing and see if customers like it", and instead very much in the vein of the way Amazon treats AWS: as a set of infrastructure services they themselves consume, but also happen to expose to the public.

Now, they might make it private in the future, but as long as Google are using containers for everything, I don't think the service is likely to just go unmaintained and fade away.

Re: Google Container Registry

#9

Post by kolev »

notatoad wrote: post #3

>Pricing >During the beta period you will be charged only for the Google Cloud Storage storage and network egress consumed by your Docker images. Dammit google, this is not how you price things. Especially when people have been burned by price jumps on your service before. I don't know why i'd bother integrating with a service when I have no idea what the cost will be.

This could end up being more expensive than Docker's own or CoreOS's. People would rather pay a flat fee rather than worrying about storage and bandwidth.
Post reply on HN