3 ms·
Seems you could also do this: # SIZE WHAT 1 ~100 MB Base OS 2 Y MB Minimal standalone runtime built with JLink 3 X MB App code (no
by deno 4y ago
Seems you could also do this:
# SIZE WHAT
1 ~100 MB Base OS
2 Y MB Minimal standalone runtime built with JLink
3 X MB App code (not in above image)
Then later you only change #2 if you need more modules or you’re updating the runtime. What makes sense will be situation specific. But presumably if you’re after the security benefits of minimal runtime and don’t want to pay too much premium in storage this is the optimal configuration. Of course doing it this way increases your build complexity somewhat significantly.
- KronisLV 4y ago> Then later you only change #2 if you need more modules or you’re updating the runtime. This is an excellent point, albeit one more thing to think about (which can still be worth it). > What makes sense seems to be very situation specific. This is true, honestly the variety of the configurations out there (e.g. dynamic scaling, where the base layers won't benefit from the ability to cache things, or PaaS solutions where nodes might change for different deployments) makes me doubt the usefulness of my post. Guess that's why there is no one best solution for ALL circumstances.