4 ms·

What other containerization technologies?

by maxaf 9y ago

peterkelly 9y ago
- chroot - Zones (Solaris) - Jails (FreeBSD) - OpenVZ (Linux) - LXC (Linux) - VServer (Linux) - lmctfy (Linux) - WPARs (AIX) ... and more; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating-system-level_virtualization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating-system-level_virtual...
- djsumdog 9y ago
  Most people use LXC to run containers that run full operating systems right? (Where it loads init/systemd and then processes .. basically a full VM but lightweight?) The others are all more single process isolated, but how many others have the image building/hashing/layering system of Docker. I personally wish Docker was more of a first class citizen on FreeBSD, but the official port was way out of date the last time I checked.
- m1keil 9y ago
  I'm not sure about the rest but OpenVZ never got into mainline kernel and required custom extensions while Docker did not. It's probably very contributing factor.
- xorcist 9y ago
  Probably should add systemd-nspawn to that list. Regular systemd that you probably need to know how to use anyway can launch things in namespaces and even use common image formats. Very useful.
- drdaeman 9y ago
  Docker images is a simple quick-and-dirty packaging solution with all the pieces necessary (building, versioning, storage and deployment). I believe this is why it won. Don't think any of those other options had anything similar. The alternatives, like building and deploying apps with native OS packages (e.g. .debs) were significantly more complicated and less portable. (While it's not that Docker images are better than native packages, they're doubtlessly generally easier.)
- oblio 9y ago
  Being a noob at this, do any of those: * have a image repo, image layering and versioning so that the community can contribute and reuse existing stuff? If not, that's already a big downside * do they configure networking by default so that you can access the container? This is very nice for usability

What other containerization technologies?

by maxaf 9y ago

What other containerization technologies?

- chroot - Zones (Solaris) - Jails (FreeBSD) - OpenVZ (Linux) - LXC (Linux) - VServer (Linux) - lmctfy (Linux) - WPARs (AIX) ... and more; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating-system-level_virtualization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating-system-level_virtual...

djsumdog 9y ago
Most people use LXC to run containers that run full operating systems right? (Where it loads init/systemd and then processes .. basically a full VM but lightweight?) The others are all more single process isolated, but how many others have the image building/hashing/layering system of Docker. I personally wish Docker was more of a first class citizen on FreeBSD, but the official port was way out of date the last time I checked.
m1keil 9y ago
I'm not sure about the rest but OpenVZ never got into mainline kernel and required custom extensions while Docker did not. It's probably very contributing factor.
xorcist 9y ago
Probably should add systemd-nspawn to that list. Regular systemd that you probably need to know how to use anyway can launch things in namespaces and even use common image formats. Very useful.
drdaeman 9y ago
Docker images is a simple quick-and-dirty packaging solution with all the pieces necessary (building, versioning, storage and deployment). I believe this is why it won. Don't think any of those other options had anything similar. The alternatives, like building and deploying apps with native OS packages (e.g. .debs) were significantly more complicated and less portable. (While it's not that Docker images are better than native packages, they're doubtlessly generally easier.)
oblio 9y ago
Being a noob at this, do any of those: * have a image repo, image layering and versioning so that the community can contribute and reuse existing stuff? If not, that's already a big downside * do they configure networking by default so that you can access the container? This is very nice for usability