Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Use Alpine as base Docker image #119
What this PR does / why we need it:
Reduces size of artifact Docker images by using Alpine Linux, comparisons between
Which issue this PR fixes
Special notes for your reviewer:
Tested by running both images locally and applications started up properly using Alpine based container.
@@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #119 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 19.86% 19.86% ======================================= Files 58 58 Lines 7419 7419 ======================================= Hits 1474 1474 Misses 5838 5838 Partials 107 107
There is no
Just one more question, earlier (am an year out-dated here), there used to be an "opinion" not to use alpine based images in production. Do you know if this view is changing now? Are there some examples of official docker images moving towards alpine..
@kmova In regards to Alpine in production, we use it in a few different applications and it is stable as Ubuntu. The only major issue we've run into is dns resolution in musl libc when using service discovery within container orchestration. For the most part this has been resolved though (see gliderlabs/docker-alpine#8).
Almost all Docker Official Images have an Alpine variant. The only major difference right now is Alpine does not have full multi-arch support, which should be resolved shortly (gliderlabs/docker-alpine#304).
Oct 18, 2017
@ecliptik , I still see some issues with DNS resolution in alpine (understood as much from the thread referred as well ). Here is my resolv.conf :
The issue renders even the CLI commands on the maya container way too slow (confirmed by setting the nameserver to 127.0.0.1, which immediately restores the speed - but we don't want this, right)