Re: Docker containers
From: Mladen Gogala <gogala.mladen_at_gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:32:47 -0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <pan.2016.08.31.19.32.46_at_gmail.com>
>
>
> We use that successfully for a cloud service that requires SDN.
>
>
> VMWare and the likes simulate a complete machine including simulated
> hardware. That is why you can run a Windows in a VM that sits on a
> Linux host. Compare that to LXC and Docker where there is just one
> kernel and kernel features are used to restrict access, show only a part
> of the filesystem (chroot like), assign virtual network interfaces etc.
> There is much less overhead. (And of course this comes at a price: you
> cannot run something inside a Docker container which requires a newer
> kernel than the host has.)
>
> Apart from testing maybe.
>
>
>
> Which might be just a /slight/ hindrance for productive services that
> host important data... ;-)
>
> Still, it is also a hype and there is no point in running berserk just
> because someone asks for reasons why they do that. This is a warning
> sign that the decisions at that shop are made based on the wrong
> reasons. Shudder.
>
> Cheers
>
> robert
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:32:47 -0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <pan.2016.08.31.19.32.46_at_gmail.com>
[Quoted] On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 19:33:14 +0200, Robert Klemme wrote:
> On 31.08.2016 10:58, Andy wrote:
>> Mladen Gogala wrote:
>
>>> Docker containers are light-weight virtual machines which are >>> allegedly much more efficient than the traditional VM's, created by >>> VMWare or Hyper- >>> V. I don't see Docker being present in any significant numbers in my >>> client environments. Cloud service providers are still using VMWare, >>> Hyper-V and they don't seem to being present in any significant >>> numbers, >> >> I've never seen or heard of them in use for anything, let alone >> production systems.
>
> We use that successfully for a cloud service that requires SDN.
>
>> Colour me skeptical abut their (Docker) claims >> of efficiency.
>
> VMWare and the likes simulate a complete machine including simulated
> hardware. That is why you can run a Windows in a VM that sits on a
> Linux host. Compare that to LXC and Docker where there is just one
> kernel and kernel features are used to restrict access, show only a part
> of the filesystem (chroot like), assign virtual network interfaces etc.
> There is much less overhead. (And of course this comes at a price: you
> cannot run something inside a Docker container which requires a newer
> kernel than the host has.)
But you do lose portability. I very much doubt that Docker container, created for the Linux kernel would work on Winduhs.
>
>>> I believe that any virtual machine, not only Docker, is a complete >>> nonsense when it comes to RAC. >> >> Agreed.
>
> Apart from testing maybe.
>
>>> So, is an Oracle database in a Docket container practical or just >>> another marketing fad, like agile, DevOps and BAAS (Bug as a service)?
>
>> One thing it almost certainly could be described as is 'unsupported'.
>
> Which might be just a /slight/ hindrance for productive services that
> host important data... ;-)
>
> Still, it is also a hype and there is no point in running berserk just
> because someone asks for reasons why they do that. This is a warning
> sign that the decisions at that shop are made based on the wrong
> reasons. Shudder.
>
> Cheers
>
> robert
[Quoted] Actually, the person who responded with the most zeal told me that I should do that because Docker crossed the $1bn boundary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKKHSAE1gIs
-- Mladen Gogala The Oracle Whisperer http://mgogala.byethost5.comReceived on Wed Aug 31 2016 - 21:32:47 CEST