-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28/01/15 20:10, Joe Landman wrote:
On 01/28/2015 03:03 PM, James Cuff wrote:
Large dependency radii - love it!
As one of those grumpy IT guys that control the spice, I for one
embrace our new container overlords! Especially once all
It seems that in environments where you don't care about security then
docker is a great enabler so that scientists can make any kind of mess in a
sandbox type environment and no one cares because your not on a public
facing network. There are however difficulties in using docker with mpi so
its
On 05:09PM Wed 01/28/15 -0800, Egan Ford wrote:
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Gavin W. Burris b...@wharton.upenn.edu
wrote:
I guess I would have to ask a few questions of the developer considering
docker... WHY do you need to be outside of a self-contained directory?
Given that
And Andrew Holway writes:
Docker was encouraging us to do very sloppy work.
Define us. My perspective is that Docker-ish things can let
system staff focus on the hardware and low-level interfaces
maintained exactly the way you intend. Then application
consultants, if you have those on staff,
On 1/28/15, 12:30 PM, Jason Riedy wrote:
And Andrew Holway writes:
Docker was encouraging us to do very sloppy work.
Define us. My perspective is that Docker-ish things can let
system staff focus on the hardware and low-level interfaces
maintained exactly the way you intend. Then application
This is the problem that I think everyone using Docker now is looking to
solve. How can you distribute an app in a reasonable manner an remove all
of the silliness you don't need in the app distribution that the base OS
can solve.
Its seems to encourage users to do whatever they want in the
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 02:48:33PM -0500, Joe Landman wrote:
You do remember this is the Beowulf list, originally comprised of
researchers who decided to be their own sysadmins/hardware vendors/etc in
order to get their research done, right?
Even in today's mainly post-big-iron age,
Large dependency radii - love it!
As one of those grumpy IT guys that control the spice, I for one
embrace our new container overlords! Especially once all that messy
security stuff gets sorted out. Interestingly, there is an almost
identical conversation going on the XSEDE campus list as I
On 08:23PM Wed 01/28/15 +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
So you end up with very knowledgeable users and programmers having to build
their own compilers and toolchains in the teeth of sysadmins who don't want
anyone to mess up their supported systems as required by the service level
And Gavin W. Burris writes:
Great, but then how do you patch for critical vulns?
Beyond all the other responses (with which I agree), consider the
current GHOST issue. If the possibly vulnerable bits are within
container images, then for batch jobs exposure ends once the image
is finished
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:08 AM, Ellis H. Wilson III el...@cse.psu.edu wrote:
No, I really don't feel like
working with my IT staff every time I want to change the toolchain or
recompile such-and-such magical cache replacement algorithm into this
version of the kernel. Imagine that. I just
On 01/28/2015 03:39 PM, Jason Riedy wrote:
But the growing quantity of crap
software from a system level that produces useful science results
can be supported without the current levels of pain.
This cannot be overstated. Even (or perhaps, ESPECIALLY) in CS there is
an egregious amount of
On 28 Jan 2015, at 22:05, Ellis H. Wilson III el...@cse.psu.edu wrote:
So, the obvious answer here is, provide your standard operating
environments in the form of containerized/VM/whatever images quartiles 1 and
2 can use, and allow quartiles 3 and 4 to spin up their own. Multiple
On 29/01/15 05:32, Joe Landman wrote:
Docker/VMs allow you to package your app, once, and be done with it.
New app, new package. Packaging can be done programmatically.
This is the appification of HPC, à la mobile phones.
It brings with it the same issue that has dogged the distro
On 01/28/2015 07:02 PM, Christopher Samuel wrote:
On 29/01/15 05:32, Joe Landman wrote:
Docker/VMs allow you to package your app, once, and be done with it.
New app, new package. Packaging can be done programmatically.
This is the appification of HPC, à la mobile phones.
It brings with it
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Gavin W. Burris b...@wharton.upenn.edu
wrote:
I guess I would have to ask a few questions of the developer considering
docker... WHY do you need to be outside of a self-contained directory?
Given that this is mostly an HPC crowd, this answer may not be 100%
You've got it all wrong, Joe. I repeat... Docker is a great enabler!
Don't all of your researchers yearn to be sysadmins? Don't all
sysadmins yearn to be done with OS issues in order to free up more time
to chase amber lights on hardware?
But seriously, more options are a good thing. Docker
And Gavin W. Burris writes:
Sure, distribute your container, but also consider writing code
that can be compiled easily in a self-contained directory like a
home directory.
That ship sailed long ago and isn't coming back.
All the world is your laptop is pretty much how it is for current
On 1/28/15, 1:19 PM, Gavin W. Burris wrote:
You've got it all wrong, Joe. I repeat... Docker is a great enabler!
Don't all of your researchers yearn to be sysadmins? Don't all
sysadmins yearn to be done with OS issues in order to free up more time
to chase amber lights on hardware?
I think
Docker does seem to be quite the enabler. It seems to be enabling
sloppy programmers, and encouraging users that don't know how to set
LD_LIBRARY_PATH to go straight for root access. Too many cooks and all.
On 06:10PM Wed 01/28/15 +0100, Andrew Holway wrote:
This is the problem that I think
Didn't mean to upset you there, Ellis. I'm talking about every other
discipline that isn't CSE. I encourage researchers to NOT be their own
IT department, so that their time is freed up to do research. Obviously
if your research IS the system, that is the exception.
On 02:08PM Wed 01/28/15
I guess I would have to ask a few questions of the developer considering
docker... WHY do you need to be outside of a self-contained directory?
Are you installing things that spray files all over the filesystem? Are
you breaking system-level library dependencies? Great, but then how do
you
On 01/28/2015 02:00 PM, Gavin W. Burris wrote:
Researchers do not want to be sysadmins, and if they do, they
aren't publishing.
This statement is so infuriatingly incorrect I'm embarrassed to even be
responding to it.
You do remember this is the Beowulf list, originally comprised of
On 01/28/2015 02:08 PM, Ellis H. Wilson III wrote:
On 01/28/2015 02:00 PM, Gavin W. Burris wrote:
Researchers do not want to be sysadmins, and if they do, they
aren't publishing.
This statement is so infuriatingly incorrect I'm embarrassed to even
be responding to it.
Heh ...
You do
On 01/28/2015 02:16 PM, Gavin W. Burris wrote:
Didn't mean to upset you there, Ellis. I'm talking about every other
discipline that isn't CSE. I encourage researchers to NOT be their own
IT department, so that their time is freed up to do research. Obviously
if your research IS the system,
On 01/28/2015 03:03 PM, James Cuff wrote:
Large dependency radii - love it!
As one of those grumpy IT guys that control the spice, I for one
embrace our new container overlords! Especially once all that messy
security stuff gets sorted out. Interestingly, there is an almost
identical
On 01/27/2015 10:33 AM, Jason Riedy wrote:
And Andrew Holway writes:
The most interesting subject around docker is security and the fact
that it provides pretty much null actual containerisation
I know I'm more interested in it for packageization: Provide
This is the problem that I think
And Andrew Holway writes:
The most interesting subject around docker is security and the fact
that it provides pretty much null actual containerisation
I know I'm more interested in it for packageization: Provide
and support a very low-level, bare OS, then let different apps
build an
It's amazing what you can get published. Those results seem pretty
obvious to me.
On 01/21/2015 04:26 PM, Andrew Holway wrote:
*yawn*
On 19 August 2014 at 18:16, Kilian Cavalotti
kilian.cavalotti.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Douglas Eadline
*yawn*
On 19 August 2014 at 18:16, Kilian Cavalotti
kilian.cavalotti.w...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Douglas Eadline deadl...@eadline.org wrote:
I ran across this interesting paper by IBM:
An Updated Performance Comparison of Virtual Machines and Linux
I ran across this interesting paper by IBM:
An Updated Performance Comparison of Virtual Machines and Linux Containers
Nothing like hard numbers. I created a short article with links on Cluster
Monkey:
http://clustermonkey.net/Select-News/docker-versus-kvm-hard-numbers-for-hpc.html
--
Hi all,
On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Douglas Eadline deadl...@eadline.org wrote:
I ran across this interesting paper by IBM:
An Updated Performance Comparison of Virtual Machines and Linux Containers
It's an interesting paper, but I kind of feel it's comparing apple to
oranges. They're
32 matches
Mail list logo
