4 ms·
Serious question. We have a master DB and a slave, two memcache servers and 3 webservers behind a load balancer. We're not a public-facing company and so have
by jakejake 11y ago
Serious question. We have a master DB and a slave, two memcache servers and 3 webservers behind a load balancer. We're not a public-facing company and so have no reason to be building for "web scale" or whatever, we're well within capacity.
Deploying new code (happens weekely) is just as simple as clicking one deploy button in our version control system (which does a "git pull" on the web servers). DB changes (which are very rare, once or twice a year) we run manually. The cache servers never change. All of the server run automated security updates on the OS. Otherwise we upgrade non-essential packages every few months.
Is there a way that using Docker could make things better for us? I feeling the "you should be using Docker" coming at me from every angle. Our deployment is certainly not very sexy but it is simple and doesn't take a major amount of effort. Is there a use case for a company like mine?
- contingencies 11y agoNot really. If your master burns and dies, your recovery or promotion process on the slave is probably manual. That's OK, but you could make it automated. Docker wouldn't actually solve the hard bits, but would possibly make the automation easier.
- rattray 11y agoMy guess is probably not, you're doing just fine. If your server configurations change for some reason in the future (sounds unlikely) it might be easier to start from scratch with Docker than manually adjust the servers; but that all depends on your situation.
- i_have_to_speak 11y agoYou're doing an excellent job. Don't let all the marketing money fool you.