4 ms·
It seems to me they are more focused on NOsql databases with multiple nodes and shared data like cassandra. So that you don't have to worry too much about volu
by gongfupotass 10y ago
It seems to me they are more focused on NOsql databases with multiple nodes and shared data like cassandra. So that you don't have to worry too much about volume/data mgmt because you will have multiple copies of the data on other containers when you lose a docker host or a container.
You also should conside that docker might not be the best option as opposed to just some vms on openstack for your much needed databases.
I'm stuck trying convince my co-workers that docker is not the answer to everything.
- ShakataGaNai 10y agoIn no way did I mean to convey "store data IN the container" as I had simply assumed no one was that silly. What I actually meant was as "there is no way to deal with volumes". So spinning up 100 instances and hot failover doesn't help if it doesn't deal with the attached volumes. Without that functionality, the orchestration is less magic and more "eh".
- djsumdog 10y agoDon't use OpenStack. It's an appropriate solution never. I've been at too many shops where OpenStack is just a bottomless cesspool of the company hemorrhaging money to keep a shitty broken platform barely stable.