bigstrat2003 4 hours ago

Containers do not reduce reliance on VMs, really. Those containers still need a server to run on, and that server is almost certainly going to be a VM and not bare metal.

▲

nix0n an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> that server is almost certainly going to be a VM and not bare metal

I understand that this is normal but I've never understood it.

If all the containers are running the same company's applications (so they don't care about security boundaries between them), what's the difference between having all the containers under the same kernel vs separate kernels?

	▲	donavanm 39 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The VM layer gives you an aspect of fungibility that commodity hardware doesn’t. It’s being able to over provision, dynamically reallocate hardware resources, or do things like live migration and entire system snapshots. That hardware/system management aspect is what VM’s give you and containers don’t. Note: if you want to conflate “containers“ with an entire job management and scheduling system (“k8s”) then you’re not actually talking about the current target customer for VMware.
	▲	wmf an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It's cargo culting. Even 37 Signals fell for it.

▲

4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

twoodfin 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Sure, but at that level it’s totally commoditized by the hyperscalers. VMWare brings nothing to the table.