3 ms·
Actually it's becoming more of a complaint in 2016 with rise AWS instances that pay by the container size and with the rise of languages like go, etc. which hav
by ascotan 11y ago
Actually it's becoming more of a complaint in 2016 with rise AWS instances that pay by the container size and with the rise of languages like go, etc. which have smaller runtime sizes and are more compatible with cloud computing environments like docker.
The JVM adds something like 400MB to every layer of a docker container resulting in multi gigabyte containers. Additionally the memory requirements for running a JVM put you immediately into the t2.medium range which will cost you 4X cost over a t2.nano for simply choosing to run Java instead of something with a smaller runtime footprint.
- mark242 11y agoDon't run production code on a nano. Don't run production code on a nano. Don't run production code on a nano. I don't care what language you're using, if you find yourself saying "well, I could run on a nano" just stop.
- Alupis 11y ago> The JVM adds something like 400MB to every layer of a docker container Perhaps this is the "writing on the wall" that containers aren't what you should be using to deploy your app. Just because it's the "latest craze" doesn't mean it's the best solution for the task at hand.