10 ms·
Solaris was ahead of its time. They had Zones, which was a container technology, years ago. Likewise, FreeBSD way ahead with Jails. Only later did Docker on Lin
by codetrotter 2y ago
Solaris was ahead of its time. They had Zones, which was a container technology, years ago. Likewise, FreeBSD way ahead with Jails. Only later did Docker on Linux come into existence and then containerization exploded in popularity.
- layer8 2y agoIn the early 2000s I rented a managed VPS based on FreeBSD jails. This was nice because you were root in your jail while the distribution was managed for you (security updates in particular), and you could still override any system files you wanted via the union file system. It was like the best of both worlds between a managed Unix account and a VPS where you can do anything you want as root.
- bionsystem 2y agoAND you are running bare metal, without the virtualization layer overhead, which is quite nice especially in the early 2000s :) My first project as a junior was to deploy Solaris Zones to replace a bunch of old SPARC machines. It's such a great tech and was a fun project.
- hnlmorg 2y agoLinux had a few different containerisation technologies before Docker blew up. But even they felt like a step backwards from Jails and Zones. Personally I think its more fair to say that Linux was behind the times because containerisation and virtualisation were common concepts in UNIXes long before they became Linux staples.
- stormking 2y agoWell, Docker did a few things differently then these older approaches. First, the one-process-per-container mantra, second the layered file system and build process and third, the "wireing together" of multiple containers via exposed ports. Zones and Jails were more like LXC and were mostly used as a "lightweight virtual machine".
- panick21_ 2y agoI highly recommend this talk, talking about Jails and Zones. Jails was first, but Zones took a lot of lessens from it and went further. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgN8pCMLI2U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgN8pCMLI2U
- pjmlp 2y agoHistorically, HP-UX 10 Vaults might have been there first.
- kragen 2y agoprobably lynn wheeler will tell you cp/67 was there first: https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#72 https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#72
- pjmlp 2y agoCertainly, I was only focusing on the UNIX side of the history.
- kragen 2y agounderstandable!
- p_l 2y agoCP-67 was a hypervisor, a different model altogether to the chroot/jails/zones/linux namespace evolution, the sidequest of HP Vaults and various workload partitioning schemes on systems like AIX, or the grand-daddy of chroot line, Plan 9 namespace system.
- kragen 2y agoyes, i agree, except that doesn't chroot predate plan9 by almost a decade?
- 2y ago
- 4ad 2y agoAnd ZFS, and DTrace.
- pjmlp 2y agoWhile Solaris was/is one of my favourite UNIXes, back in 1999, HP-UX already had HP Vaults, which keeps being forgotten when Solaris Zones are pointed out.
- ilikejam 2y agoI've said it before, and I'll never stop saying it. Zones were awful. Solaris had all of these great ideas, but the OS was an absolute pain in the ass to admin. And I say that from both sides of the SWAN firewall.
- EvanAnderson 2y agoMy only Solaris experience is using SmartOS. I find Zones there to be fairly easy to deal with. Is this just because SmartOS is papering-over the awfulness?
- ahoka 2y agocgroups came only three years after zones, not a huge difference.
- jiveturkey 2y agoSolaris is still ahead of its time on many things. I wish it were worth porting eBPF to Solaris.
- jeffbee 2y agoStill the only Unix where SMB works.
- cryptonector 2y ago> I wish it were worth porting eBPF to Solaris. What on Earth for? Solaris has DTrace.