scprodigy

5 ms·

1.
Ask HN: Why do you need container's fast boot speed?
3 points by scprodigy 8y ago|0 comments
2.
by scprodigy 8y ago
Hyper.sh is faster, launching your Docker image in 5 seconds.
3.
Pi – Serverless Container Platform on Google Cloud(hyper.sh)
4 points by scprodigy 8y ago|0 comments
4.
by scprodigy 9y ago
What control do you have?
5.
Show HN: Run Windows Container on Linux Server(hyper-demo.s3.amazonaws.com)
5 points by scprodigy 9y ago|4 comments
6.
Show HN: Hyper.sh Connector for Kubernetes(github.com)
1 points by scprodigy 9y ago|0 comments
7.
Serverless CI/CD(blog.hyper.sh)
1 points by scprodigy 9y ago|0 comments
8.
Hyper.sh: Container-native Cloud(docs.google.com)
99 points by scprodigy 9y ago|29 comments
9.
by scprodigy 10y ago
How long does it take launch it on triton?
10.
by scprodigy 10y ago
Did you try the test with a FIP?
11.
by scprodigy 10y ago
In my experience, it takes 1min to launch a container in Triton, but 5-10s in Hyper.
12.
by scprodigy 10y ago
Check out: https://trello.com/c/zAc1ia2E/53-hyper-func
13.
by scprodigy 10y ago
No, they are in different games basically.
14.
by scprodigy 10y ago
Let's say you have two images: web and db. Web containers ask for high cpu, but small disk. DB requires big mem and disk. With GKE, you either have different instance types for different container sizes; or you launch the BIG&TALL
15.
by scprodigy 10y ago
Don't think so. Though their stack are open source.
16.
by scprodigy 10y ago
They don't use Linux container, they use hypervisor-based container (see: github.com/hyperhq/hyperd). Therefore it is VM-level isolation.
17.
by scprodigy 10y ago
Ok, I'm a bit lost too. So, your question is the memory consumed by the VM kernel? The tradeoff is the ops overhead to manage the VM instance.
18.
by scprodigy 10y ago
But you don't own the server, thus you don't pay for the overhead (if any).
19.
by scprodigy 10y ago
The value proposition (difference) of Hyper is that while other CaaS try to manage your VM cluster, Hyper makes the cluster just go away.
20.
by scprodigy 10y ago
In terms of a public cloud service, you (customer) don't care. You pay for the amount of memory you used, whether there is one kernel, or many of them, is irrelevant.
21.
by scprodigy 10y ago
What overhead?
22.
Hyper_, the container-native cloud, is now generally available(blog.hyper.sh)
16 points by scprodigy 10y ago|2 comments
23.
by scprodigy 10y ago
website: https://hyper.sh
24.
by scprodigy 10y ago
check https://hyper.sh container-based cloud
25.
First news from Dockercon: runV integrated with Docker(blog.hyper.sh)
7 points by scprodigy 10y ago|0 comments
26.
by scprodigy 10y ago
A patch is available: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3435
27.
by scprodigy 10y ago
Actually, scaleup is pretty easy for both VM and Linux container. But scale-down is very troublesome for both. And the scheduler will need the mem size (not right now, but inevitable)
28.
by scprodigy 10y ago
LXD = VM-like Linux container HyperContaineer = (Docker) Container-like ultra-light VM Make sense?
29.
by scprodigy 10y ago
So we end up with: HW -> EC2 scheduler -> VM -> You -> Container scheduler -> Container -> App There should not be two schedulers if container is secure for multi-tenancy.
30.
by scprodigy 10y ago
Totally not!

More ›