Re:Docker in Production: A History of Failure
by X86BSD on Friday November 04, 2016 @12:58PM
(#12874040)
SmartOS, FreeBSD, Tredly, etc
Re:Docker in Production: A History of Failure
by SSLy on Friday November 04, 2016 @06:19PM
(#12876636)
Tredly is "just" a FreeBSD distribution. And Linux can't have ZFS in-tree because CDDL.
Re:Docker in Production: A History of Failure
by X86BSD on Friday November 04, 2016 @06:29PM
(#12876715)
It is not just a version of FreeBSD. The base is FreeBSD but the tooling for containers is not stock. It's value added bits that are shaping up to be very nice for containers on a more stable, secure, and storage friendly stack.
Re:Docker in Production: A History of Failure
by SSLy on Friday November 04, 2016 @07:03PM
(#12876950)
Yes, but the storage parts which the discussions are about are from FreeBSD
Re:Docker in Production: A History of Failure
by mmagin on Friday November 04, 2016 @03:16PM
(#12875144)
Ah, you must be from the alternate universe where most of us have heard of more than one of those!
Re:Docker in Production: A History of Failure
by eropple on Friday November 04, 2016 @06:48PM
(#12876851)
What you've heard of, and what's workable and useful, do not necessarily intersect.
Re:Docker in Production: A History of Failure
by gkfasdfasdf on Friday November 04, 2016 @12:31PM
(#12873808)
From the username, x86 BSD perhaps?
Alright, the suspense is killing me: what OS is the one that gets it right? I ask this to "the rest of us" as you put it.