Re:Why Databases Are Not for Docker Containers
by throwawayish on Monday February 06, 2017 @07:35PM
(#13585831)
The numerous performance and stability issues (not just in the containers, but also affecting the main cgroup / "host" rather badly) I had with Docker, but never with LXC, which, according to you would be pretty much the same thing - "just namespacing your process". But it isn't.
Docker is ok when it works, hell when it doesn't, has lots of bugs and regularly regresses. I don't understand why you'd run production infrastructure on that and not on any of the alternatives.
Re:Why Databases Are Not for Docker Containers
by user5994461 on Monday February 06, 2017 @07:07PM
(#13585670)
FYI: The networks and the disks are entirely abstracted, with multiple extremely complex abstraction layers.
Re:Why Databases Are Not for Docker Containers
by brobinson on Monday February 06, 2017 @09:28PM
(#13586451)
Not necessarily. You could use --net=host and -v /db_data:/db_data (equivalent of `sudo mount --bind /db_data /the/containers/root/fs/dir/db_data`)
Run like this, there is no disk or network performance difference between running the db process directly on the host or via a Docker container.
As others have mentioned, this is a really poor article.
Unless you've gone out of your way, Docker (as well as other Linux container systems) are just namespacing your process. There's no extra abstraction layer, it's just a more restricted execution environment.