Closed phadej closed 2 years ago
Sounds reasonable, though if -prof
is significantly bigger, it may make more sense to add a variant instead? I think we are stuck with quite large images due to GHC + dependencies, so the value of a -slim
is questionable to me, but I have not looked at the numbers recently.
1-slim-stretch
tag, which downloaded a layer of size 371.3MB for me.
slim
vs stretch
differ mainly in the choice of base image.8.4.4
main layer is is 244MB,I think we can afford -prof
in normal image and -slim
can stay slim. That would be good for consistency with other official images. Our current image is what other call "slim": no extras.
I'm planning to implement this suggestion. I have seen people expect it recently and I think that is fairly reasonable. So..
-slim
variants (for Debian only) which do not include profiling support and are based off of the debian -slim
variants.The profiling files take the image from 1.73GB -> 2.46GB (740mb) for 9.2 on Debian buster. Not the worst I guess. I think minimising image size is overrated.
I will ponder this more. On the flip side there has been little interest in including profiling libs.. hmm
Decided to just pull the trigger as described above.
It would make sense to have them in full images, but omit from
-slim
images.I just run into a use case where I need
-prof
stuff.opinions, @hvr @psftw?