Kubernetes Production Patterns and Anti-Patterns

Re:Kubernetes Production Patterns and Anti-Patterns by shykes on Friday June 09, 2017 @10:30PM (#14525872)

The zombie reaping problem is fixed in Docker. You can simply use `docker run --init` with no argument, and it will spawn a tiny init that will reap children processes correctly. We don't enable the flag by default to respect backwards compatibility.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Kubernetes Production Patterns and Anti-Patterns by dvdgsng on Saturday June 10, 2017 @07:11AM (#14526938)

Sidenote: this Docker native implementation uses Tini (https://github.com/krallin/tini#using-tini)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Kubernetes Production Patterns and Anti-Patterns by atmosx on Saturday June 10, 2017 @02:40AM (#14526409)

Could you explain a bit further?

What does backwards compatibility mean in this context. The API?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Kubernetes Production Patterns and Anti-Patterns by shykes on Saturday June 10, 2017 @07:42PM (#14529848)

In this context it means preserving the default behavior of running the command specified in the image as PID 1, and not injecting any extra processes in the namespace. The difference in the runtime environment is subtle, but some applications rely on it. If we changed this default those applications would behave differently after upgrading to Docker 1.13 or later.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Kubernetes Production Patterns and Anti-Patterns by lobster_johnson on Friday June 09, 2017 @10:37PM (#14525882)

This would require Kubernetes to do the same, which I don't think it does?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Kubernetes Production Patterns and Anti-Patterns by shykes on Friday June 09, 2017 @10:38PM (#14525888)

It's up to the Kubernetes developers to decide if they want to use that feature of Docker, yes.

[ Parent | on HN ]