3 ms·

> building containers is generally noticeably slower than Makefiles I totally agree, if the year was 1992. Compute is cheap. Storage is cheap. Let's not try a

> building containers is generally noticeably slower than Makefiles I totally agree, if the year was 1992. Compute is cheap. Storage is cheap. Let's not try and keep living in the past.

minitech 4y ago
No, it’s noticeably slower than Makefiles on present-year hardware. This degrades the developer experience regardless of how cheap compute and storage are. (This is mostly Docker’s fault and not inherent to containers, though.)
- hatware 4y ago
  > This degrades the developer experience regardless of how cheap compute and storage are. I would argue that if you only have one good tool to do something, you have an opportunity to make much better tools for that something. It's not docker's job to be better than Makefile with every use-case. You do realize what you're asking for here right? It's impossible. No tool is perfect for every use-case.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
    > It's not docker's job to be better than Makefile with every use-case. You do realize what you're asking for here right? It's impossible. No tool is perfect for every use-case. The root of this thread is > We actually use docker multistage build as mentioned here as a replacement for make file. So yes, it absolutely is reasonable to ask that docker, when used in the exact same way as make, should not give us a noticeable performance regression compared to running make.
  - pid-1 4y ago
    Did you even read the article?
    - hatware 4y ago
      345 words is barely an article. What about my comments are off topic exactly...?
- hinkley 4y ago
  Part of CI is fast feedback. Slow builds started soon still suffer from not providing the full experience. It’s not a ratio that’s a problem, although that doesn’t help. It’s that there are psychological cutoffs where adding a minute to a build drastically changes how people interact with it. 1 vs 3 vs 7 vs >7 minutes make substantial differences. So taking a build from 8 to 6 minutes is valuable out of all proportion to the actual speed up, and slowing from 6 to 8 is a substantial loss.

> building containers is generally noticeably slower than Makefiles I totally agree, if the year was 1992. Compute is cheap. Storage is cheap. Let's not try and keep living in the past.

minitech 4y ago

No, it’s noticeably slower than Makefiles on present-year hardware. This degrades the developer experience regardless of how cheap compute and storage are. (This is mostly Docker’s fault and not inherent to containers, though.)

hatware 4y ago
> This degrades the developer experience regardless of how cheap compute and storage are. I would argue that if you only have one good tool to do something, you have an opportunity to make much better tools for that something. It's not docker's job to be better than Makefile with every use-case. You do realize what you're asking for here right? It's impossible. No tool is perfect for every use-case.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y ago
  > It's not docker's job to be better than Makefile with every use-case. You do realize what you're asking for here right? It's impossible. No tool is perfect for every use-case. The root of this thread is > We actually use docker multistage build as mentioned here as a replacement for make file. So yes, it absolutely is reasonable to ask that docker, when used in the exact same way as make, should not give us a noticeable performance regression compared to running make.
- pid-1 4y ago
  Did you even read the article?
  - hatware 4y ago
    345 words is barely an article. What about my comments are off topic exactly...?
hinkley 4y ago
Part of CI is fast feedback. Slow builds started soon still suffer from not providing the full experience. It’s not a ratio that’s a problem, although that doesn’t help. It’s that there are psychological cutoffs where adding a minute to a build drastically changes how people interact with it. 1 vs 3 vs 7 vs >7 minutes make substantial differences. So taking a build from 8 to 6 minutes is valuable out of all proportion to the actual speed up, and slowing from 6 to 8 is a substantial loss.