3 ms·
You don’t even need Docker. Another great technology to learn is LXC and driving it from the CLI / a script. All my hosts run a default OS with a 20 line fire
by gorgoiler 6y ago
You don’t even need Docker. Another great technology to learn is LXC and driving it from the CLI / a script.
All my hosts run a default OS with a 20 line firewall and a bridge.
The top level host has a zpool backed by a blank file in /tank.device.
The actual work is done by a bunch of LXC hosts all cloned from a standard base installation. Anything persistent goes in a per container zfs filesystem mounted in each container’s root. The only thing I ever backup is the /tank.device file.
Wiping everything and building from scratch is a pleasure.
- GordonS 6y agoI personally found Docker and Compose pretty simple to learn, and after years working with them I'm pretty well acquainted, but am interested to learn if there are any tangible benefits of using LXC instead of Docker?
- gorgoiler 6y agoDocker has nice image caching and fetching. It’s all about deploying and containerising in one step, usually a one line shell script alongside the container config. LXC is more like deploying disposable OS instances and then having to deploy your app yourself, separately. It’s more bare metal but has fewer surprises in terms of supporting IPv6 and not having any inscrutable iptables magic happening on the host OS. Docker is IKEA. LXC is hiring a joiner. (Not a value judgement.)