On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 10:25:17AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 08:28:13AM -0500, Neil Horman wrote: > > I would question why its necessecary to keep systemd out so ardently. > > If you build your container layers properly, you can effectively put > > systemd in a base container and layer other applications in child > > containers that inherit from it. One systemd installation can be used > > by 1000's of child containers, making the overhead negligible. > > Initial deploy isn't insignificant, though, especially in the case > where you're bringing up and down multiple hosts in a cluster. > Perhaps, but in the grand scheme of things, we're talking about a single large install per host for potentially thousands of child containers. That seems like a reasonable trade off. > More importantly, rebuilding all of those child containers when there's > a systemd change isn't negligible at all. > I would disagree. Its what I'm doing in freight, and it works pretty well. If I update my base container with a new systemd, the child containers regenerate in seconds. > And third, not all application container formats support Docker's > concept of layering, and I'd like to make sure we can adapt to those > too. > So we're talking about container formats that are both minimal, and don't support the concept of file system inheritance? Is seems like the latter would be a integral component to support of the former, and more a problem for those formats to fix, rather than for a container developer to work around. Neil > -- > Matthew Miller > <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Fedora Project Leader > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
