Oh also, if you ran your workloads on Mesos, you could mix LXC and Docker. I guess people could add LXC support to K8S for the same outcome, either way having a provider that could cope with that would be awesome.
On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Tom Barber <t...@spicule.co.uk> wrote: > I'll fork this so we're not hijacking another thread. > > Mesos runs Mesos tasks via frameworks or Docker/Rocket containers > currently. Annoyingly they used to have a scriptable container endpoint I > was hoping to knock up a POC against but they removed it, and my C is > woeful so implementing it will take some time. I also asked on the Mesos > mailing lists and they couldn't grok the use case, apparently docker does > everything anyone needs ;) > > When I was at the Pentaho meetup last week, there's already a bunch of > data folk who run DC/OS or Mesos to manage their workloads which sorta > validated my use case as prior to that it was only theoretical. > > There are certainly a bunch of useful docker containers, I wouldn't deny > that for a second, but the docker reality in production is often a lot like > the Big Data stuff a few years back, it works but does it work well enough. > In some places certainly, but in others not so much. We make a lot of use > of Docker recently on some NASA projects, but I'm under no illusions that > in reality Juju running containers would be a much improved plan, but they > already have Mesos etc running so why upset the apple cart? Similarly at > ApacheCon we had developers praising Docker and Systems Administrators > saying its the bane of their life. > > That said, you don't really see people spin up a scalable hadoop setup in > Docker because it would be annoying to maintain, but you could easily do > that in Juju on whatever, or Puppet etc. Of course you can do it, and it > will become more common over time especially with k8s auto scaling etc for > sure. > > Who said Mesos or DC/OS providers and charms wouldn't get official > support? That said currently we're just lacking bandwidth to build them(I > speak entirely as an impartial observer I have no real idea if they'd get > Canonical support, but why not?) ;) > > Tom > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Merlijn Sebrechts < > merlijn.sebrec...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Wait, wouldn't this require juju to have an "mesos" provider, so juju can >> request lxc containers from mesos? I've heard something like this mentioned >> at the Summit, will this become a reality? [that would be awesome!] >> >> We want support for Docker containers because: >> - A lot devs we work with create their prototypes in docker >> - There are a bunch of useful docker containers with stuff that isn't >> charmed yet >> >> We want Kubernetes because: >> - Auto scaling >> - Auto failure recovery >> - It has a future beyond Docker >> - The Charms are officially supported by Canonical (hence Kubernetes > >> Mesos) >> >> >> 2016-11-18 10:41 GMT+01:00 Tom Barber <t...@spicule.co.uk>: >> >>> What you want Merlijn is LXC on Apache Mesos so you can provision a >>> Mesos cluster on MAAS and then provision Juju Charms into LXC on the >>> infinitely scalable cluster! Docker is cool but until it releases the >>> proper orchestration stuff, it comes a poor second to deploying workloads >>> with Juju ;) >>> >>> That's not a slight at the great work Adam, Chuck and co are doing, but >>> feedback I got from people at the Pentaho User meetup last weekend and >>> ApacheCon this week who all get 'stuck' with Docker once the convenience >>> factor has gone away. Anyway, I digress.... Amazing getting proper Docker >>> running on LXD as well. >>> >>> Tom >>> >>> >>> -- Tom Barber CTO Spicule LTD t...@spicule.co.uk http://spicule.co.uk GB: +44(0)5603641316 US: +18448141689
-- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
