DevOps in the '10s are the move to Stateless Servers, just like Client-Server in the '90s was the move to Stateless Clients.
No more persistent stores in Servers, just like we eliminated on Clients. That's how to focus on this, and how Containers and DevOps are different than Traditional Virtualization and it's continuing support for persistent data on Servers. -- bjs P.S. A few PaaS/DevOps solutions like Red Hat OpenShift do offer persistent stores for containers. But I wouldn't cover that concept at all. DISCLAIMER: Sent from my Honor 8, please excuse any typos -- Bryan J Smith - Technology Mercenary [email protected] - [email protected] - http://linkedin.com/in/bjsmith On Feb 25, 2017 23:06, "Jeremy Hajek" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thank you for the draft and hardwork here. I am a professor teaching > these exact subjects in the university - seeing the exact changes espoused > here and 100% agree with the direction. > > I had one piece of advice. The Docker material needs to be reviewed > because the concepts there are vastly different than Virtualization. > Perhaps the Docker material could be its own track/specialization? > > What I mean is traditional Virtualization which we have been using for a > while now (VMware, Virtual Box, others) is essentially the same concepts > as a regular PC-- its hardware virtualization (virt of a BIOS, Drivers, and > so on) > > Docker (and containers in general) move to a different concept of > immutable infrastructure--which flies in the face of all the LPIC base > standards. Those needs are lessened when you are enabling containers that > have no SSH even. Containers that are being spun up via AWS Lambda for > instance are done so fast and then destroyed--because it is cheaper to spin > a container up calculate something and then spin it down (much in the way > you would use a function()in a programming language) . TL DR Containers > (Docker) are more than just lightweight virtualization. > > Those are my two cents > > What are your thoughts? > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2017 at 11:00 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Send lpi-examdev mailing list submissions to >> [email protected] >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> [email protected] >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> [email protected] >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of lpi-examdev digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. Re: LPIC-OT DevOps Tools Engineer Objectives Draft >> ([email protected]) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2017 14:07:06 -0500 >> From: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [lpi-examdev] LPIC-OT DevOps Tools Engineer Objectives >> Draft >> To: [email protected] >> Message-ID: <[email protected]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >> >> Dear Fabian, >> it sounds great to me. >> I?ve read your Draft and from my point of view it is great. >> So no additions. >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> >> Maik >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Fabian Thorns <[email protected]> >> To: This is the lpi-examdev mailing list. <[email protected]> >> Sent: Fri, Feb 24, 2017 11:37 am >> Subject: [lpi-examdev] LPIC-OT DevOps Tools Engineer Objectives Draft >> >> >> >> Dear all, >> >> >> as you might know, we're working on a new certification, "LPIC-OT DevOps >> Tools Engineer". >> >> >> We've started the Job Task Analysis in 2016 to find out about the >> relevance of the exam's topics. First of all, I'd like to thank all of you >> who took the time to rate the tasks, add new tasks and contact us directly >> to provide feedback. >> >> >> We evaluated all your input and today we can finally present you the >> result -- the initial draft on the objectives for the new certification! >> >> >> I'd like to invite you to take a look to our wiki at >> >> >> https://wiki.lpi.org/wiki/LPIC-OT_DevOps_Tools_Engineer_Objectives_V1 >> >> >> and share your thoughts and comments on this new exam either here on the >> list or directly with me. The current objectives really are a draft, we're >> still able to adjust and change things. So please take that chance to >> review the objectives and bring up any suggestions you might have. >> >> >> Looking forward to the discussion, >> >> >> Fabian >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lpi-examdev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/lpi-examdev/atta >> chments/20170224/a93f3a66/attachment.html >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lpi-examdev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev >> >> End of lpi-examdev Digest, Vol 104, Issue 4 >> ******************************************* >> > > > > -- > Jeremy Hajek > Systems Architect - School of Applied Technology > Industry Associate Professor of Information Technology and Management > ext: 630-682-6075 <(630)%20682-6075> (2-6075) > lab: 630-682-6060 <(630)%20682-6060> (2-6060) > Main: 312-567-5291 <(312)%20567-5291> (7-5291) > cell: 630-666-1961 <(630)%20666-1961> > skype: jeremy.hajek > > _______________________________________________ > lpi-examdev mailing list > [email protected] > http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev >
_______________________________________________ lpi-examdev mailing list [email protected] http://list.lpi.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lpi-examdev
