Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)TR
Posts
2
Comments
430
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I just scrolled the whole thread and can’t find any at all, what are you talking about?

    Elitism isn’t „I like arch and I think it is good for some stuff”, it’s „I’m smart because I use arch, you’re dumb if you don’t, and any problems you have with it are your fault.”

  • Cons of containers are slightly worse disk and memory consumption.

    Pros:

    • ease of installation
    • declarative, consistent configuration
    • security some degree of sandboxing
    • dependency management is solved

    Stick with the containers

  • Honest answer? When trump said “Take the guns away first, due process later.” I was a pretty big gun nut at the time and it felt like a slap in the face. Shortly afterwards I encountered a YouTube video that actually explained the science behind climate change in a way that made it obviously true and that I hadn’t encountered before. The conservative worldview is a house of cards, once you take out a couple the whole thing falls apart pretty quickly.

    Now I’m a very progressive atheist and more than a little ashamed of my former self. Still like guns, but I keep that to myself

  • Ok but is there room for the idea that your intuitions are incorrect? Plenty of things in the world are counter-intuitive. ‘docker-compose up -d’ works the same whether it’s one container or fifty.

    Computer resources are measured in bits and clock cycles, not the number of containers and volumes. It’s entirely possible (even likely) that an all-in-one container will be more resource-heavy than the same services split across multiple containers. Logging from an all-in-one will be a jumbled mess, troubleshooting issues or making changes will be annoying, it’s worse in every way except the length of output from ‘docker ps’

  • I disagree with pretty much all of this, you are trading maintainability and security for easy setup. Providing a docker-compose file accomplishes the same thing without the sacrifice

    • separate volumes for configuration, data, and cache because I might want to put them in different places and use different backup strategies. Config and db on SSD, large data on spinning rust, for example.
    • separate container for the database because the official database images are guaranteed to be better maintained than whatever every random project includes in their image
    • separate networks because putting your reverse proxy on a different network from your database is just prudent