On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 03:25:56PM -0400, Jay Pipes wrote: > I think the above strategy is spot on. Unfortunately, that's not how the > Docker ecosystem works.
I'm not sure I agree here, but again nobody is forcing you to use this
tool.
> operating system that the image is built for. I see you didn't respond to my
> point that in your openstack-containers environment, you end up with Debian
> *and* Fedora images, since you use the "official" MySQL dockerhub image. And
> therefore you will end up needing to know sysadmin specifics (such as how
> network interfaces are set up) on multiple operating system distributions.
I missed that part, but ideally you don't *care* about the
distribution in use. All you care about is the application. Your
container environment (docker itself, or maybe a higher level
abstraction) sets up networking for you, and away you go.
If you have to perform system administration tasks inside your
containers, my general feeling is that something is wrong.
> Sure, Docker isn't any more limiting than using a VM or bare hardware, but
> if you use the "official" Docker images, it is more limiting, no?
No more so than grabbing a virtual appliance rather than building a
system yourself.
In other words: sure, it's less flexible, but possibly it's faster to
get started, which is especially useful if your primary goal is not
"be a database administrator" but is actually "write an application
that uses a database backend".
I think there are uses cases for both "official" and customized
images.
--
Lars Kellogg-Stedman <l...@redhat.com> | larsks @ {freenode,twitter,github}
Cloud Engineering / OpenStack | http://blog.oddbit.com/
pgpKaSDODdjVy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
