4 ms·
> the difference between alpine (~30 MB) and debian-slim (~80) Given that it's a different layer, the your container runtime isn't going to redownload the laye
by adolph 3y ago
> the difference between alpine (~30 MB) and debian-slim (~80)
Given that it's a different layer, the your container runtime isn't going to redownload the layer anyway, right?
- robinhoodexe 3y agoExactly. Part of the appeal to consolidate all of our container images to use Debian-slim is the ability to optimise the caching of layers, both in our container registry but also on our kubernetes cluster’s nodes (which can be done in a consistent manner with kube-fledged[1]). [1] https://github.com/senthilrch/kube-fledged https://github.com/senthilrch/kube-fledged
- robertlagrant 3y agoThanks for that - that operator sounds extremely useful!
- kstrauser 3y agoAnd even if it did, in an ancient data center that only uses gigabit ethernet, that's only a .5s longer download. And even a $4 DigitalOcean server comes with 10GB of storage, so that 50MB is only 1/200th of the instance's store. (I'd also bet that nearly no one uses instances that tiny for durable production work where 50MB is going to make a difference.)