5 ms·
I agree. I had some VMs that I wanted to turn into containers. With LXC it was a breeze, and the result is very much like a "lightweight VM". Docker seems more
by cuspycode 7y ago
I agree. I had some VMs that I wanted to turn into containers. With LXC it was a breeze, and the result is very much like a "lightweight VM". Docker seems more like putting a single application process in a container, which is a very different thing. And if I want to do that, I'll seriously consider running the application in a unikernel (e.g. OSv) instead.
- de_watcher 7y agoBy the way, the lightweight VM project is currently the LXD by Ubuntu/Canonical.
- cuspycode 7y agoYeah, LXD is what I have been using. Maybe I should have said "LXC/LXD" instead of just "LXC".
- lunchables 7y agoIf you are trying to use docker to build lightweight VMs you are really swimming upstream. In the (docker, etc) container world they use the phrase "pets not cattle". Containers are designed to be stateless (nothing is stored in the container) and to be spun up and down as demand changes. https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/653/what-is-the-definition-of-cattle-not-pets https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/653/what-is-the-d... If you want to build a mini-VM using containers, LXC is a great choice. If you want to deploy software, easily, with CI/CD and [auto-]scaling, then containers are what you want.