Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Or real virtualization + SELinux + sVirt ... libvirt on RHEL/Fedora/CentOS puts the qemu process into a container too.


For security yes, however, for performance / resource requirements docker is going to beat libvirt/qemu.


I think of docker as a "nicer chroot", i.e. it might be nice for testing deployment of networked applications with lots of servers, where setting up a new VM for each one would be both slow and an overkill.

Is running something inside docker worse than running the same application on the host from a security pov? If not then you can consider docker just as one way of deploying an application on the host, i.e. not something for shared hosting of independent/possibly malicious applications.


In addition, we have repeatedly hit problems with our "mock" build system which uses a different kernel from what userland software is normally tested with. eg: [1] [2]. This stuff is going to hit Docker users sooner or later. It is also infuriatingly hard to debug.

[1] http://bugzilla.redhat.com/1062533

[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/563103#c8


Or for running anything other than Linux on the exact same kernel. Running Windows, for example, or older copies of Linux.


Does it run Windows? Because libvirt/qemu does. A slow speed beats 0 speed usually? ;-)


A slow speed beats 0 speed usually? ;-)

Not if you're running Windows.


> Not if you're running Windows.

Not if Windows puts money in the pocket


Just buy more computers. Works for us and is cheaper than VMWare ESX (the thing we replaced).

Xen would be cheaper and give us better utilisation but getting rid of VMware was a good step towards cost savings :)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: