3 ms·
"These kind of systems have their own configs, be it elasticsearch.yml or my.cnf. The Dockerfile format is completely fucking useless at this kind of thing." A
by sz4kerto 11y ago
"These kind of systems have their own configs, be it elasticsearch.yml or my.cnf. The Dockerfile format is completely fucking useless at this kind of thing."
A solution I like: use Docker and mount the config as a volume or add it to the image in an additional build step. (I.e. have a my-app:2.3.4-base and then when moving to prod, create a new image my-app:2.3.4-prod). The reason why 'Docker in production' is inevitable (as I can see it) is because it makes trivial to iterate on your whole setup, not just your application code. If you work with gcc version X and Java version y, then you change and test with new versions, then you want to version control these changes, and update them in production easily, within your normal development flow.
(By inevitable, I mean that it's going to happen. Images are the new packages.)
- ownagefool 11y agoI don't really get it to be honest. Sure, the Dockerfile format is simple but if you need to do anything complicated, you just call another script that does it. I don't really see how it harms you? Also, I don't really understand why he wouldn't run his private registry in kubernetes if he has such a stack. I'd pretty much run everything in it.
- j_mcnally 11y agoI agree. The people bashing "no pun intended" docker, probably aren't using it properly.
- mkhpalm 11y ago"(By inevitable, I mean that it's going to happen. Images are the new packages.)" Without packages docker itself becomes mostly useless to the vast majority of people. Packages will always come first no matter how badly people try to avoid them.
- ddw 11y agoThat isn't unique to Docker though, Ansible can do the same thing. Add Packer and Terraform and you're production-ready too.