This looks very interesting:

https://www.cockroachlabs.com/

Lets try it, and anyone else knows about it? or used it ?

Sounds to good to be true

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@stacksofplates said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@stacksofplates said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@stacksofplates said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@stacksofplates said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@stacksofplates said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@stacksofplates said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@stacksofplates said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

Containers use shared kernels by definition, that's what makes it a container.

This isn't really how Docker works. Docker manages namespaces. If you use "FROM Alpine" then it will share the kernel, but if you write an app in Go and use "FROM scratch" it has zero reliance on a specific kernel. You can also run full VMs in a Docker container which is how Red Hat uses OpenShift to deploy OpenStack VMs.

Well go requires the kernel too. But yes for the most is the "from scratch" part which allows more abstraction

Well I mean you have to have a kernel for anything to run. My point was it is technically possible to run a Go app in Docker natively on Windows with no Linux anywhere.

Well sure, but you have a Windows kernel. Why would a Linux kernel be expected to be required to run a Go app? The Windows kernel has a Linux compatibility layer to mimic Linux calls. So we'd expect it to be able to run anything that can run on Linux.

I assume you are using Go as an example because normally you need to compile Go to the platform and if you compile against Linux, then Windows would not be able to run it? But is Docker handling the translation here, or is Windows? What if you ran it on BSD? Or a different architecture, like ARM?

Go statically links the compiled code. Same source code is compiled for Linux or Windows or Mac or BSD. You're making my point with the first statement. There are no kernel dependencies, external libraries, etc with a Go app in the container. The same source could be run across most operating systems (excluding AIX and some other UNIX).

But your point was that Docker was including a kernel to run a full VM. My point was that it doesn't have to, it uses a shared kernel. So this makes my point, that Go doesn't require a full VM, therefore can use whatever kernel is already there. So it is a shared kernel.

OMG. It was not. My point is you can run Docker containers with NO SHARED KERNEL.

Right, so Docker is a type 2 hypervisor.

If you believe this statement is wrong, please explain how? Because to me, you just screamed "DOCKER IS A TYPE 2 HYPERVISOR" while seemingly trying to say it is not.

Shared Kernel = Contrainerization
No Shared Kernel = Type 2 Hypervisor (when an OS is needed beneath, like with Docker.)

You're being purposefully obtuse. Your last sentence would mean KVM is a type 2. Docker creates a KVM VM on bare metal, type 1 end of story.

No, I'm not being obtuse at all. KVM doesn't run ON an OS, it IS the OS, making it a TYpe 1 (or Type 0 some call it.) We've covered this a lot and is unrelated here.

Docker is using KVM? So Socker is EXACTLY like ProxMox now? Just using Docker as the container and KVM for the virtualization? So Docker is NOT able to do full VMs, but just provides an interface to a hypervisor?

That's not at all the same as what you had said, that Docker was doing it itself. Any tool can automate something that already exists. I can write a script to manage KVM, it doesn't make the resulting VMs a script, or part of my script. It's just a management tool to the real thing.

It was obtuse to say it like Docker had this power and was doing things itself. Docker runs on top of an OS, so if Docker itself is virtualizing a full VM by definition it is a type 2. If Docker requires KVM, it can be a management tool for a type 1.

They use kubernetes to orhestrate docker brining up KVM VMs for OpenStack. Sure you can write scripts but you don't get anywhere near the power you have with k8s.

It's not a type 2 you're looking at this incorrectly. Docker is ensuring the VM runs on the host. The VM isn't running in a shared kernel at all. Again docker manages namespaces and cgroups. The it doesn't "contain" things like LXC. You can write your own SELinux policies and such to do this but it doesn't by default.

But when running a "normal" Docker workload, it is a container just like LXC (but not LXC any more) and does this stuff. That Docker was containerization was its bread and butter purpose from day one, just one focused on a very specific usage, for app isolation.

Docker still does all that, right? That K8s can orchestrate KVM seems great, but is Docker in play when doing that?

No it's not. Default docker is namespaces and cgroups. They call it "containerization" but it is namespaces and cgroups.

Namespaces and cgroups were how the first containerization was done. That's the core of containers. That's how LXC does it, more or less.

@scottalanmiller @stacksofplates

I found something that will please you both, check this guy:

https://twitter.com/DEVOPS_BORAT
@DEVOPS_BORAT

Hard part in devops is make money from wheel after you are reinvent it.

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@emad-r said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@emad-r said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@emad-r actually The main benefit of containers is to disconnect sysadmin and devel work.

Not really. Containers are virtualization like any other, they've been around for decades and the idea that they were anything for developers is an extremely recent use case of only a very specific subset of containers. Most containers, and most of the history of containers, don't do anything like that, no more than any other kind of virtualization.

Yes but I think here we are talking docker. Docker is like python virtual envs for anything and not just for python. This is their main meaning to me.

Sure, if we are talking Docker and not talking Containerization, then Docker just seems like a sloppy, error prone way to do that.

My biggest issue with Docker is that it seems to make things worse rather than better. More complexity, more things to break, more dependencies. It introduces the very problems it claims to solve, problems that we weren't experiencing previously.

It does that, it does create more complexity at first.

Installing an app for us is much easier, like PHP-FPM + apache, it is only 10 commands or something, however if you did in docker/container in VPS you get the extra benefit of having clean environment in the host OS always + the container can be moved around easily to another VPS + it is much easier for non smart people to get your app and its updates + Docker provides free accout to publish one app.

That's a theory, but in the real world I've seen the opposite. Docker requires too much knowledge and skill on both ends and isn't as portable as people say. Docker requires both the admins and the developers to do more work and if either gets it wrong, Docker is harder to deal with. And since you rarely control both sides, it's a pretty big problem.

Docker doesn't really give the benefits you list. It can do that, but so can more traditional containers, without all of the Docker problems.

So given that moving workloads, and containerizing aren't benefits to Docker (it does them, but it's not unique), what problem do you feel Docker is actually solving over older, simpler solutions?

If there is one thing Docker doesn't do, it's make things easier for non-smart people. It requires all people to be smarter. This is exactly the opposite of the value it is providing.

It does make software installs on remote location very easy man.

Ubuntu new installer, actually lists docker in the Ubuntu SErver install wizard, so you can easily tell an IT officer to

Load the ISO , tick this this this and bam you get ubuntu installed with docker.

However the way that Ubuntu installs Docker is abit Microsoftish as it installs it as SNAP to promote there SNAPs being able to manage anything which is like running a fork of fork, but the point is it gets installed and then theorically the IT officer in that remote location just types

docker pull YOUR SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY

it is much easier said than done.

Why use Docker when you could just use Snaps directly?

Cause you dont know much about it and you use Docker cause it is the most known.

But how can I get survey of the most used tools in this early stage, like we all know that in Hypervisor world it goes like this

1. VMware ESXi
2. KVM and Hyper-V

So people that dont know much will always choose ESXi

I would love to know how much OpenVZ, LXC, and all that.

I heard snap is different abit than docker as it only focuses on applications

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@emad-r said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@emad-r actually The main benefit of containers is to disconnect sysadmin and devel work.

Not really. Containers are virtualization like any other, they've been around for decades and the idea that they were anything for developers is an extremely recent use case of only a very specific subset of containers. Most containers, and most of the history of containers, don't do anything like that, no more than any other kind of virtualization.

Yes but I think here we are talking docker. Docker is like python virtual envs for anything and not just for python. This is their main meaning to me.

Sure, if we are talking Docker and not talking Containerization, then Docker just seems like a sloppy, error prone way to do that.

My biggest issue with Docker is that it seems to make things worse rather than better. More complexity, more things to break, more dependencies. It introduces the very problems it claims to solve, problems that we weren't experiencing previously.

It does that, it does create more complexity at first.

Installing an app for us is much easier, like PHP-FPM + apache, it is only 10 commands or something, however if you did in docker/container in VPS you get the extra benefit of having clean environment in the host OS always + the container can be moved around easily to another VPS + it is much easier for non smart people to get your app and its updates + Docker provides free accout to publish one app.

That's a theory, but in the real world I've seen the opposite. Docker requires too much knowledge and skill on both ends and isn't as portable as people say. Docker requires both the admins and the developers to do more work and if either gets it wrong, Docker is harder to deal with. And since you rarely control both sides, it's a pretty big problem.

Docker doesn't really give the benefits you list. It can do that, but so can more traditional containers, without all of the Docker problems.

So given that moving workloads, and containerizing aren't benefits to Docker (it does them, but it's not unique), what problem do you feel Docker is actually solving over older, simpler solutions?

If there is one thing Docker doesn't do, it's make things easier for non-smart people. It requires all people to be smarter. This is exactly the opposite of the value it is providing.

It does make software installs on remote location very easy man.

Ubuntu new installer, actually lists docker in the Ubuntu SErver install wizard, so you can easily tell an IT officer to

Load the ISO , tick this this this and bam you get ubuntu installed with docker.

However the way that Ubuntu installs Docker is abit Microsoftish as it installs it as SNAP to promote there SNAPs being able to manage anything which is like running a fork of fork, but the point is it gets installed and then theorically the IT officer in that remote location just types

docker pull YOUR SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY

it is much easier said than done.

@emad-r

If DevOps is not Job Title, but how the hell I am DevOps Engineer
(Recent change thus the whole dive into all of this.)

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@scottalanmiller said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@emad-r actually The main benefit of containers is to disconnect sysadmin and devel work.

Not really. Containers are virtualization like any other, they've been around for decades and the idea that they were anything for developers is an extremely recent use case of only a very specific subset of containers. Most containers, and most of the history of containers, don't do anything like that, no more than any other kind of virtualization.

Yes but I think here we are talking docker. Docker is like python virtual envs for anything and not just for python. This is their main meaning to me.

Sure, if we are talking Docker and not talking Containerization, then Docker just seems like a sloppy, error prone way to do that.

My biggest issue with Docker is that it seems to make things worse rather than better. More complexity, more things to break, more dependencies. It introduces the very problems it claims to solve, problems that we weren't experiencing previously.

It does that, it does create more complexity at first.

Installing an app for us is much easier, like PHP-FPM + apache, it is only 10 commands or something, however if you did in docker/container in VPS you get the extra benefit of having clean environment in the host OS always + the container can be moved around easily to another VPS + it is much easier for non smart people to get your app and its updates + Docker provides free accout to publish one app.

Also the performance aspect is very good, but the storing this is bad abit.

The key idea here it is not currently hyper visor replacement, it is complementary tool that is good when you have service/server that does not need to store data.

@matteo-nunziati said in Check my 2 min audio theory on Containers:

@emad-r actually The main benefit of containers is to disconnect sysadmin and devel work.
Docker has a very mature environment where a lot of stuff can be easily rebuilt with a few hooks in github or similar.
Sys admin installs and manages the underlying os and the developer can upgrade the runtime as he needs in a disconnected way without minding about sysadmin and viceversa.
Also containers should be os agnostic (as long as compatible docker versions are used).
Just remind that docker is live a live distro. Persistent data are not moved with the container: you need SAN like storsge between 2 docker nodes to reload the same data. And this SAN like storage must be mounted in the same path.

Why not create volumes for this data, that should be there when we import/export I assume ?

For me I am using Underlying = Ubuntu Server 18.04 it might bigger than what people use, but I like it. Alpine Linux also works with me but Ubuntu is just there in any VPS.

I am reading more about a few hooks in github I created docker repo, but still the line blurs where my work as sys admin stops and I cross to developers which I am not very smart in.

@pete-s said in Why you don't need a VPN or not?:

@scottalanmiller how do you not have VPN now?

Nope, none.

Methinks he's looking for an explanation of how you guys got rid of VPN.

Me too.

Just no need for it. Try it in reverse, what do you have that makes you want a VPN?

Files on the LAN, for the LAN users?

The thing is the technology is here and free and well documented and used.
But it is ancient abit, and there are new stuff like Certificate based authentication on many protocols now even HTTP, so check for those first, and try to implement something modern and less like I will reroute all the traffic to this client.

@travisdh1 said in So SAM has his SAM SD but i have my own EMAD USB:

@emad-r SD cards are slow. If you want a really fast portable usb drive, you want a USB3 to NVMe adapter and an NVMe drive for it: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA2RP7NF4296

~60 MB/s is similar to an old HDD, which is good from sd card.

The thing is I heard about NVMe external, but the cost/benefit ratio is much smaller.

When you factor that all USB drives

Okay I lied they are actually 12 mins, but please dont leave yet.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VbuJ-4xOhOE6Gd_wPID_GYrUsvUny4fv/view?usp=sharing

Check it out and tell me what you think, and please correct me where I am wrong.

I know there will be alot of Ummm, and stops but I tried to be an English speaker as much as i can.

Open it while you do something else, and listen and tell me if I am true or false or half half, very interested to hear your feedback.

I boosted the audio, cause i sounded quiet, if you want the original recording without the buzz on the background due to audio boosting 160%, here is the original no boost:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sb0LHSu80cvIHzydmshTtJP5LwnZyrm3

Guys I can stress how much I am loving this new concept, forget about Thumb USB flash drive premade.

Create custom one.

Find Samsung EVO PLUS U3 SD card
Pair it with USB CARD Reader that has certified chipset + optionally lanyyard + optionally SD card cover like:

Link1

Link2

Link3

Blazing fast everything see for your self in the video below and great Samsung performance + even if the card USB connectors fails you can fix it + you can find USB to C card reader if you want + usually cheaper + you can
install VeraCrypt and carry it around and performance will be also great.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1xoTsAnFbYkuL-LSbKPjHBRl3ZNT7OdIR

Competitors even from Samsung does not have the same performance, more like half of it only.

I have the Orico one in the video.

For backups this is god send.

I know this might be not original idea like the concept of black nail polish, everyone think they are original with it, but again I dont see alot of people doing it, and it is hella great.

@pete-s said in What's in your bag?:

I switched to backpacks many years ago.

https://us.targus.com/products/checkpoint-friendly-air-traveler-16-inch-laptop-backpack-tbb012us

I usually have:

Laptop, power supply, cat6 cable, usb3 ethernet adapter for dual-homing, a couple of usb memory sticks.

High quality notepad, good pens, sticky notes, highlighters markers, whiteboard pens, presentation pointer.

Folders and a binder when needed. Books sometimes.

Earphones, earplugs, some medication like pain relievers.

When traveling I also put tickets, passport, money, keys etc in it. And water.

Pretty much the same even the brand... + mint gum.

@scottalanmiller said in What is the Best SFTP Server for Windows:

@emad-r said in What is the Best SFTP Server for Windows:

@scottalanmiller

http://www.freesshd.com/?ctt=download

freeFTPd

freeFTPd is a FTP/FTPS/SFTP server that enables user to access remote files over TCP/IP network such as Internet. Unlike FTP, FTPS and SFTP protocols provide security and strong encryption of data - great for insecure network.

Very easy and works well.

What about freeFTPd do you feel is nicer than the one built into Windows, which is the same one from Linux?

Windows has always been platform where third party software were better:

AV = ESET is better
Media Player = VLC is king
Browser= no need to comment
Task Manager = Only starting from Win 10 it began usable but process hacker is better
File Indexer = Everything
File Copy = TeraCopy

Prior to Win 10 it gave always the developers the means freely, and they developed stuff better than MS. So that is my philosophy. Besides third party free stuff works usually on all Windows platforms.

@darrel

I liked the fact you put continuous integration as it is very trendy work.

But if only we can find someone that can actually do it ....

@scottalanmiller

http://www.freesshd.com/?ctt=download

freeFTPd

freeFTPd is a FTP/FTPS/SFTP server that enables user to access remote files over TCP/IP network such as Internet. Unlike FTP, FTPS and SFTP protocols provide security and strong encryption of data - great for insecure network.

Very easy and works well.

What is in your mind a real example of the fastest path you can adopt to
continuous integration and continuous delivery

I know each case/business is different but I am researching this more and more now

@wrcombs

I thought IDE disks had special jumbers where you can make one master one slave without RAID, where you can you use PIN ,but luckily growing up I didnt manage IDE much

@black3dynamite

Disk 2 VHD have not been updated for like 5-6 years.

This on the other hand :

https://www.softpedia.com/get/System/System-Miscellaneous/VMware-Converter.shtml

IF you can login via VMware you get more updated version.

@jaredbusch said in GeekBench Results for Cloud Servers: @StorageNinja

@emad-r said in GeekBench Results for Cloud Servers:

@storageninja said in GeekBench Results for Cloud Servers:

@emad-r said in GeekBench Results for Cloud Servers:

Thought about Network testing and came up with this:

That's just a testing of peering.

Help us out then, I think we at ML need to come up with standard for testing Cloud.

And how is it peering ? cause peering means:
the exchange of data directly between Internet service providers, rather than via the Internet.

I am using the same separate server of iperf on both nodes and both nodes are located in the same geolocation.

The point is you cannot test certain things. Such as network throughput and disk speed when it comes to cloud.

You can test throughput to your office. But again based on peering agreements, you could get get hugely varying results compared to someone on another ISP to the same cloud service.

Will speedtest-cli test also wont count as an effective test ? wont it show you some of your limitations of your DL/UL

[root@centos ~]# ./speedtest-cli
Retrieving speedtest.net configuration...
Testing from *************************
etrieving speedtest.net server list...
Selecting best server based on ping...
Hosted by Vodafone DE (Frankfurt) [143.90 km]: 5.199 ms
Testing download speed................................................................................
Download: 97.13 Mbit/s
Testing upload speed................................................................................................
Upload: 99.50 Mbit/s

@scottalanmiller

Is this the C# sharp client, didnt it get stopped and some features of it removed, especially if you update ESXi. And now you have to use the web version ?