Conversation
|
Could you address the performance and stability concerns raised in https://pythonspeed.com/articles/alpine-docker-python/ ? We might also need to break up this PR so the unrelated bug / dependency changes can be reviewed separately. |
We're using alpine normally not because of built-time or size. It's more a matter of security. Normally alpine images are containing fewer packages and so there less affected to CVE's. But I will also make a config with ubi8 / microubi for the deployment on secure OpenShift installations. We also normally using build container configs. You get a smaller and more controllable image in production.
I've addressed 3 tasks in my PR:
At least the last 2 are a little dependent, 'cause the build doesn't work with the old versions. :peter |
|
@MikeRalphson thanks to PEP-0656 and this PR that blog post is no longer true. |
httpbin with compact alpine container
The goal is:
build
We are building the containers with podman (podman-desktop under MacOS or Windows):
podman build --manifest quay.io/pflaeging/httpbin:0.9.2-alpine --rm --no-cache --platform linux/amd64 --platform linux/arm64 -f Dockerfile.alpine . podman manifest push quay.io/pflaeging/httpbin:0.9.2-alpine docker://quay.io/pflaeging/httpbin:0.9.2-alpine --rm(please replace the
quay.io/pflaegingpart with your own registry place)Kubernetes rollout
The application is fully compatible with Kubernetes / OpenShift4 / OKD4.
Example objects are in the folder ./kubernetes/.