Leaving aside the philosophical discussion, another factor to consider are the database engines, I think can be used with greater efficiency out of the container and serves different daemons / processes (living in containers) with different partitions, areas or tables according to engine technology. Just an idea .. Regards
STECHS - Ing. Agustin Bertamoni Móvil: (+54911) 62183226 Skype: abertamoni-stechs Av. Boyacá 372 Piso 4º Oficina 401 (C1406BHF) Buenos Aires, Argentina On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Oliver Kraitschy <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello James, > > thank you for that explanation. That of course makes sense and i will try > to consider that philosophy in the future. > > Greetings, > Oliver > > On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 05:09:52PM +0100, James Harrison wrote: > > > For various reasons Docker is oriented towards > > one-process-per-container. Fortunately, GenieACS actually lends itself > > quite well to that approach, though startup ordering bears some > > consideration. > > > > Docker Compose (which Guillaume has used) lets you "orchestrate" a > > collection of Docker containers. If you were using something like > > Kubernetes or Mesos or something like that then they'll typically have > > their own mechanisms for orchestration, but this all still basically > > works well if you have one thing per container and tends to suck a bit > > if you have more than one thing per container, since now failures and > > monitoring apply to a blob with stuff in rather than a single process. > > > > -- > > Cheers, > > James Harrison > > _______________________________________________ > > Users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.genieacs.com/mailman/listinfo/users > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.genieacs.com/mailman/listinfo/users >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.genieacs.com/mailman/listinfo/users
