search

paz-sh / paz-haproxy

HAProxy load balancer for Paz that is configured from Etcd by Confd.
Other
7 stars 2 forks source link

Move Dockerfile to alpine base image #2

Open lukebond opened 9 years ago

lukebond commented 9 years ago

Because smaller

sublimino commented 9 years ago

Firmly agreed On 6 May 2015 21:09, "Luke Bond" notifications@github.com wrote:

Because smaller

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/paz-sh/paz-haproxy/issues/2.

rimusz commented 9 years ago

:+1:

pierreozoux commented 9 years ago

Did you consider gentoo?

Combined with packer, you might be on a better position when it comes to rkt and appc.

lukebond commented 9 years ago

@pierreozoux I haven't considered it, thanks for the tip. Looks interesting!

rimusz commented 9 years ago

@pierreozoux Can you expand more why do we need packer there? To build rkt images we need to extract gentoo rootfs and add necessary packages: in our case nodejs and haproxy ones.

pierreozoux commented 9 years ago

IMHO, packer is a nice toolchain to provision machines. Either for yesterday, barmetal, VMs or for today, docker, or tomorrow, rkt and then...

Here is a nice take on that: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7067648

But yeah, if you are just compiling HAproxy and node, I think it is fine to do it handmade :) I'm also wondering for myself, and as I like your project, I was just wondering if you were wondering also :)

Never mind, I'm just adding noise to the discussion :)

lukebond commented 9 years ago

@pierreozoux not noise at all! i'm not familiar with this toolchain so I appreciate you raising the discussion :)

rimusz commented 9 years ago

@pierreozoux it is good to know about new toolchains. But as Paz.sh runs on CoreOS we need small docker/rkt images for its services. @lukebond I did some rkt testing with gentoo via docker image, it is still much bigger than Alpine Linux based. I think we should stick to Alpine Linux for now.