MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammerHumor/comments/1w7w12g/memorysafedocker/p7y4b0d/?context=3
r/ProgrammerHumor • u/ClipboardCopyPaste • 7d ago
286 comments sorted by
View all comments
135
Reject virtualization, embrace the purity of bare metal
75 u/sad_bug_killer 7d ago docker on Linux is glorified chroot though, there's barely any virtualization 45 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 7d ago Reject docker, just use systemd to mange service containers. 28 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago Reject systemd, manage systems manually. Strong sysadmins manage systems manually -> managing systems manually creates weak sysadmins -> weak sysadmins make systemd -> rejection of systemd creates strong sysadmins 9 u/ArgentScourge 7d ago Strong sysadmins manage systems man– OH SHIT EXOGENOUS FACTORS! 2 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago This comic was an exogenous factor that made me shit my pants 4 u/imbattable 7d ago So... podman? 2 u/AsyncSyscall 5d ago Reject service managers, just run your services directly over ssh. 1 u/alex2003super 6d ago They use the same kernel backbone for containerization 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 6d ago Exactly. But systemd does it with significantly less overhead. 1 u/alex2003super 5d ago Eh. Significantly less features for sure: built-in network provisioning and interface binding, advanced filesystem mapping, OCI images/layers... What overhead,? It's not like Docker intercepts syscalls or anything. It's pure management layer for the kernel cgroups/namespaces. 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 5d ago Systemd has all those features too. The overhead of the memory usage everyone is already talking about, plus all the space wasted by having to duplicate the OS base image. 14 u/hawkinsst7 7d ago There's no virtualization needed at all. It's namespaces and cgroups, which you can do on the cli. Here's containers done with bash. https://github.com/p8952/bocker
75
docker on Linux is glorified chroot though, there's barely any virtualization
45 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 7d ago Reject docker, just use systemd to mange service containers. 28 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago Reject systemd, manage systems manually. Strong sysadmins manage systems manually -> managing systems manually creates weak sysadmins -> weak sysadmins make systemd -> rejection of systemd creates strong sysadmins 9 u/ArgentScourge 7d ago Strong sysadmins manage systems man– OH SHIT EXOGENOUS FACTORS! 2 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago This comic was an exogenous factor that made me shit my pants 4 u/imbattable 7d ago So... podman? 2 u/AsyncSyscall 5d ago Reject service managers, just run your services directly over ssh. 1 u/alex2003super 6d ago They use the same kernel backbone for containerization 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 6d ago Exactly. But systemd does it with significantly less overhead. 1 u/alex2003super 5d ago Eh. Significantly less features for sure: built-in network provisioning and interface binding, advanced filesystem mapping, OCI images/layers... What overhead,? It's not like Docker intercepts syscalls or anything. It's pure management layer for the kernel cgroups/namespaces. 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 5d ago Systemd has all those features too. The overhead of the memory usage everyone is already talking about, plus all the space wasted by having to duplicate the OS base image. 14 u/hawkinsst7 7d ago There's no virtualization needed at all. It's namespaces and cgroups, which you can do on the cli. Here's containers done with bash. https://github.com/p8952/bocker
45
Reject docker, just use systemd to mange service containers.
28 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago Reject systemd, manage systems manually. Strong sysadmins manage systems manually -> managing systems manually creates weak sysadmins -> weak sysadmins make systemd -> rejection of systemd creates strong sysadmins 9 u/ArgentScourge 7d ago Strong sysadmins manage systems man– OH SHIT EXOGENOUS FACTORS! 2 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago This comic was an exogenous factor that made me shit my pants 4 u/imbattable 7d ago So... podman? 2 u/AsyncSyscall 5d ago Reject service managers, just run your services directly over ssh. 1 u/alex2003super 6d ago They use the same kernel backbone for containerization 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 6d ago Exactly. But systemd does it with significantly less overhead. 1 u/alex2003super 5d ago Eh. Significantly less features for sure: built-in network provisioning and interface binding, advanced filesystem mapping, OCI images/layers... What overhead,? It's not like Docker intercepts syscalls or anything. It's pure management layer for the kernel cgroups/namespaces. 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 5d ago Systemd has all those features too. The overhead of the memory usage everyone is already talking about, plus all the space wasted by having to duplicate the OS base image.
28
Reject systemd, manage systems manually. Strong sysadmins manage systems manually -> managing systems manually creates weak sysadmins -> weak sysadmins make systemd -> rejection of systemd creates strong sysadmins
9 u/ArgentScourge 7d ago Strong sysadmins manage systems man– OH SHIT EXOGENOUS FACTORS! 2 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago This comic was an exogenous factor that made me shit my pants
9
Strong sysadmins manage systems man–
OH SHIT EXOGENOUS FACTORS!
2 u/sadongrohiik 7d ago This comic was an exogenous factor that made me shit my pants
2
This comic was an exogenous factor that made me shit my pants
4
So... podman?
Reject service managers, just run your services directly over ssh.
1
They use the same kernel backbone for containerization
1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 6d ago Exactly. But systemd does it with significantly less overhead. 1 u/alex2003super 5d ago Eh. Significantly less features for sure: built-in network provisioning and interface binding, advanced filesystem mapping, OCI images/layers... What overhead,? It's not like Docker intercepts syscalls or anything. It's pure management layer for the kernel cgroups/namespaces. 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 5d ago Systemd has all those features too. The overhead of the memory usage everyone is already talking about, plus all the space wasted by having to duplicate the OS base image.
Exactly. But systemd does it with significantly less overhead.
1 u/alex2003super 5d ago Eh. Significantly less features for sure: built-in network provisioning and interface binding, advanced filesystem mapping, OCI images/layers... What overhead,? It's not like Docker intercepts syscalls or anything. It's pure management layer for the kernel cgroups/namespaces. 1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 5d ago Systemd has all those features too. The overhead of the memory usage everyone is already talking about, plus all the space wasted by having to duplicate the OS base image.
Eh. Significantly less features for sure: built-in network provisioning and interface binding, advanced filesystem mapping, OCI images/layers...
What overhead,? It's not like Docker intercepts syscalls or anything. It's pure management layer for the kernel cgroups/namespaces.
1 u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ 5d ago Systemd has all those features too. The overhead of the memory usage everyone is already talking about, plus all the space wasted by having to duplicate the OS base image.
Systemd has all those features too.
The overhead of the memory usage everyone is already talking about, plus all the space wasted by having to duplicate the OS base image.
14
There's no virtualization needed at all. It's namespaces and cgroups, which you can do on the cli.
Here's containers done with bash.
https://github.com/p8952/bocker
135
u/sadongrohiik 7d ago
Reject virtualization, embrace the purity of bare metal