4 ms·

For postgresql, it would likely be better to use Docker directly. Subuser adds support for things like sound and GUI to Docker, for a simple database, you don't

For postgresql, it would likely be better to use Docker directly. Subuser adds support for things like sound and GUI to Docker, for a simple database, you don't need subuser.

sandGorgon 11y ago
I already run my servers on docker. I was alluding to a containerized package manager. Will the golden age of a single package manager across distro be finally possible through Docker?
- ende42 11y ago
  What about Nix (https://nixos.org/nix/ https://nixos.org/nix/)?
- timthelion 11y ago
  Maybe... I think that if the question is "through runc compatible containers" than the answer is a definite YES, but through Docker is probably a no. Even the Docker folks tell me that I should stop using Docker and start using runc. Docker has a lot of design baggage from the server space, and when you cut that all away, you don't get much but a tiny bit of code that creates a namespace ;). But that tiny bit of code is really really revolutionary :D It is the difference between secure and reproducible isolation and "normal unix"... What I would like to have in the future, that Docker does not provide, is deduplication. If I have two images with the same file in both, then I should be able to have that take up no more space than if there was one file in one place. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sc6_XgNXyk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sc6_XgNXyk
  - fapjacks 11y ago
    Well, I mean... Docker does provide deduplication on the same base image. So two containers created "FROM ubuntu:14.04" which are both reading from (for example) /etc/issue are using the same data. But you specifically mention across different images, and I just don't think there are enough similarities to warrant that functionality. I mean how many files are the same across CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 14.04? I just don't see the benefit that you do.

4 ms·

For postgresql, it would likely be better to use Docker directly. Subuser adds support for things like sound and GUI to Docker, for a simple database, you don't

by timthelion 11y ago

For postgresql, it would likely be better to use Docker directly. Subuser adds support for things like sound and GUI to Docker, for a simple database, you don't need subuser.

sandGorgon 11y ago
I already run my servers on docker. I was alluding to a containerized package manager. Will the golden age of a single package manager across distro be finally possible through Docker?
- ende42 11y ago
  What about Nix (https://nixos.org/nix/ https://nixos.org/nix/)?
- timthelion 11y ago
  Maybe... I think that if the question is "through runc compatible containers" than the answer is a definite YES, but through Docker is probably a no. Even the Docker folks tell me that I should stop using Docker and start using runc. Docker has a lot of design baggage from the server space, and when you cut that all away, you don't get much but a tiny bit of code that creates a namespace ;). But that tiny bit of code is really really revolutionary :D It is the difference between secure and reproducible isolation and "normal unix"... What I would like to have in the future, that Docker does not provide, is deduplication. If I have two images with the same file in both, then I should be able to have that take up no more space than if there was one file in one place. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sc6_XgNXyk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Sc6_XgNXyk
  - fapjacks 11y ago
    Well, I mean... Docker does provide deduplication on the same base image. So two containers created "FROM ubuntu:14.04" which are both reading from (for example) /etc/issue are using the same data. But you specifically mention across different images, and I just don't think there are enough similarities to warrant that functionality. I mean how many files are the same across CentOS 7 and Ubuntu 14.04? I just don't see the benefit that you do.