3 ms·
> In my experience, "slim" Debian images (like `python:slim`) aren't significantly larger than Alpine-based ones, but save lots of time and headache. I came to
by nickjj 8y ago
> In my experience, "slim" Debian images (like `python:slim`) aren't significantly larger than Alpine-based ones, but save lots of time and headache.
I came to pretty much the same conclusion too.
For years I was using Alpine but as of about a year ago I've been going with Debian Slim and haven't looked back.
I'd much rather have the confidence of using Debian inside of my images than save 100MB on a base image (which is about what it is in a real web project with lots of dependencies).
- drdaeman 8y agoIn my experience, the difference is sometimes even less than 100MiB (which is quite a lot). For the current ("real-world") project I'm working on, it's about 25MiB - something like 325MiB for Alpine and 350MiB for slim Debian base images. Either way, it's not 1.12GiB I was getting with a fat `FROM python:3` base image.