Linux - ContainersThis forum is for the discussion of all topics relating to Linux containers. Docker, LXC, LXD, runC, containerd, CoreOS, Kubernetes, Mesos, rkt, and all other Linux container platforms are welcome.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I'm on the horns of a dilemma in considering changes for a system that is now deployed to half-a-dozen VMs running under VMWare at a hosting company. We are considering a move to RackSpace which has, in addition to VMWare, a purely container-based option.
I notice that the several VMs are "barely utilized." I wonder if it would not be better in the long run to use a much-bigger virtual machine(?) ... y'know, "one computer than can do everything under one roof" . Containers seem to be a technology that would work very well if the "one machine" were truly big-enough. But, for political reasons and otherwise, I must ponder very carefully a break from a familiar-sounding model ... a model of my devising, at the time ... that arguably works.
The various web-sites must share files ... truly, "many gigabytes" of them. I know that file-sharing (now using NFSv4) is a potential bottleneck. But I fear deploying to a single container-based arrangement and running into a situation when, in the future, I'd have to have more than one container-host and have to be sharing files again. There are no complicated computational requirements to speak of.
Dedicated hosting (at RackSpace) tops at 64MB/box at what's likely to be a comfortable price-point.
I'd like to hear the experiences of people who have actually moved their "modest web-site ... a few hundred stores" into this sort of environment, particularly if you did standardize on containers. How did you "test the water?"
You can get a dedicated UltraSPARC computer with 2000 processors, Terabytes of RAM and practically unlimited storage and ORACLE database instances hosted by ORACLE/Sun for just $148,000.00 a month... actually they are fairly reasonable for more modest hosting considering it's a Solaris UltraSPARC machine and you get at least one instance of ORACLE database on it. A personal metered account for your own use and development or light web serving is only an estimated $25/month. That's competitive with companies giving you Linux running on Intel running mySQL or something... I have to see what GoDaddy is charging me, I might switch. I'm glad I looked into this...
Anyway, I never really answered your question. Yes, I think partitions are better. Virtual machines are much more likely to interfere with each other, so usually you get less control over them if you're on a large shared system. Now, if you have a dedicated machine, then this probably won't be a problem. But, for example, there are many software package I can't really install on my shared virtual GoDaddy account, I don't have root access, and they tend to delete my work without backing it up. I really don't like them (GoDaddy), for hosting at least, they're OK for DNS.
I could go one of two ways: create a small number of VMs (quite possibly, "just one"), and outfit them with several containers – roughly replicating the arrangement of VMs that we are running now, or I could chart a completely different course and use OpenStack.
These web sites do not have a large number of users, but they do a large dollar-volume of business. (A single transaction might be worth $75,000 or more.) They must be rock-solid reliable, and, since they carry a large amount of photographic-image content, they must be much speedier than the existing phalanx of VMs are right now.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.