Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by throwaway894345 236 days ago
Containers have nothing to do with storage. They are completely orthogonal to storage (you can use Dynamo or RedShift from EC2), and many people run Docker directly on VMs. Plenty of us still spend lots of time thinking about storage and state even with containers.

Containers allow me to outsource host management. I gladly spend far less time troubleshooting cloud-init, SSH, process managers, and logging/metrics agents.
1 comments
dynamite-ready 236 days ago
> Containers have nothing to do with storage. They are completely orthogonal to storage

Exactly.

And sure, you can use S3/Dynamo/Aurora from an EC2 box, but what would be the point of that? Just get the app running in a container, and we can look into infrastructure later.

It's a very common refrain. That's why I believe Docker is strongly to linked the development of these proprietary, cloud based models of computing, that place containerisation at the heart of an ecosystem that bastardises the classic idea of a 'server'.

The existence of S3 is one good result of this. IAM, on the other hand, can die in dumpster fire. Though it won't...

link
throwaway894345 236 days ago
> And sure, you can use S3/Dynamo/Aurora from an EC2 box, but what would be the point of that?

An easy API? Easy replication / failover / backups? I would absolutely use S3 even with EC2.

> IAM, on the other hand, can die in dumpster fire.

I’m no great fan of AWS’s approach to IAM, but much of the pain is just the nature of fine-grained / least-privilege permissioning. On EC2 it’s more common to just grant broader permissions; IAM makes you think about least privilege, but you absolutely can grant admin for everything. And as far as a permissioning API goes, IAM is much cleaner/saner than Linux permissions.

link