Hi Akila and Imesh, Without creating a base image, if we package everything in a product specific image, host it in a local registry, and provide instructions to create a local Dockerfile extending from that image, the time taken to build the local image would be lesser. This will speedup the development/testing procedure even more. The developers can package any apps/jars/configs via the local Dockerfile (using volume mounts, etc.), for testing. I have seen this pattern used in some Docker images, for an example in the haproxy Docker image [1].
One downside is, as you mentioned, we cannot push the image to Dockerhub with Oracle JDK distribution included. Maybe we can create the product Docker image with the relevant utilities (wget, zip, unzip, etc.) + the product distribution, and push it to Docker hub. Then provide an option to package the JDK via a local Dockerfile extending from the product Dockerfile. WDYT? [1]. https://hub.docker.com/_/haproxy/ On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Akila Ravihansa Perera <raviha...@wso2.com > wrote: > Hi, > > Currently we don't have a base image for WSO2 Docker images due to image > size issues we had with it. But later we found out that this was mainly due > to multiple RUN commands, which caused Docker to add unnecessary layers. > > I think we should bring back the base image for couple of reasons; > > 1. wso2base image with minimum packages installed (wget, puppet etc) will > eliminate the need for having to run apt-get commands (which are very > expensive, time-wise) each and every time > > 2. wso2base image can be hosted publicly (without Oracle JDK of course) so > that users don't have to build wso2base but rather pull it from DockerHub. > > 3. wso2base image provides a Docker layer which reduces the amount of > traffic carried when pulling images from a Docker registry over a long > period of time. This is because base image is very unlikely to be changed, > but product images can change very rapidly (due to artifacts or > configuration change, product version etc.). It is unnecessary to carry the > information in the lower level layers each time a product image is changed. > > If you must use a single image, I found this cool Docker tool written in > Python which can be used to squash Docker layers called docker-squash [1]. > Following is a comparison of Docker images built with/without wso2base and > squashed images; > > [image: Inline image 3] > > In summary; > wso2am-1.10.0 with base image: 1.079GB > wso2am-1.10.0 with base image and *squashed*: 948MB > wso2am-1.10.0 *without* base image: 969MB > > wso2esb-4.9.0 with base image: 794MB > wso2esb-4.9.0 with base image and *squashed*: 664MB > wso2esb-4.9.0 *without* base image: 685MB > > In conclusion, introducing a base image with minimum packages has a image > size overhead of around 100+MB, but having individual images without a > hierarchy can cause a significant amount of unnecessary information being > transferred over the network when pull/push'ing to/from a registry. > > I've created a PR for this feature at [2]. Also used > "--no-install-recommends" option to apt-get when installing packages to > prevent unnecessary packages being installed. Please share your thoughts. > > [1] https://github.com/goldmann/docker-squash > [2] https://github.com/wso2/dockerfiles/pull/46/files > > Thanks. > -- > Akila Ravihansa Perera > WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com/ > > Blog: http://ravihansa3000.blogspot.com > > _______________________________________________ > Dev mailing list > Dev@wso2.org > http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev > > -- Thanks and Regards, Isuru H. +94 716 358 048* <http://wso2.com/>*
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@wso2.org http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
