Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [rdf4j-dev] dockerhub deployments
Just a quick word on the use of arm. Both Amazon and Microsoft offer arm servers in their data centers. Today Apple launched their first arm based computers. I’ll be transitioning to arm asap, just waiting for a 16” with decent amount of ram. 

But right now, the only person I know who uses arm is Bart (rpi maybe?). 

I’m a big fan of getting our docker images out there. It’s the only way I know to run up the workbench. I’m too young to have used spring before spring-boot :P 

I also have a pr open on syncing the arm and amd docker images. Never got around to fixing the comments by Bart. 

Here is the script for building and running up the docker image: https://github.com/eclipse/rdf4j/blob/master/assembly/src/main/dist/docker/build.sh

PR with the alignment of the arm and amd images and also a fix to the aforementioned script. https://github.com/eclipse/rdf4j/pull/2375

Håvard

On 10 Nov 2020, at 23:52, Jeen Broekstra <jeen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Hi Bart, everyone,

Just wanted to let you know, first of all, that I finally got around to getting myself sufficient permissions for our dockerhub repo.

Couple of questions: First of all, I notice the README on Dockerhub is a little out of date, is that content fed from anywhere in our git repo, or is written manually/separately on Dockerhub itself (in other words: where should I update)?

Our current docker images are manually pushed after a release. I am not terribly familiar with the workings of Dockerhub but it appears to have an automated build feature that can inspect our github repo and trigger on particular tags. Is that worth exploring a bit further?  

Another thing: we produce an AMD and an ARM image. Is there really value in having both? I mean I'm not against it but I kinda suspect that the vast majority of our users are on AMD architectures.

Even if we continue releasing an ARM image, I'm thinking that our default should just be the AMD one, so I'd suggest that we use tag names like this:

 - rdf4j-workbench:latest <-- latest AMD image
 - rdf4j-worbkench:3.4.3 <- AMD image for release 3.4.3
 - rdf4j-workbench:arm64v8-latest  <-- latest ARM image
 - rdf4j-workbench:arm64v8-3.4.3 <-- latest ARM image

Finally: anything else I should be aware of in terms of Dockerhub, and where/when/how we produce docker images?

I suggest that we make it a habit to notify if we intend to deploy a new docker image following a release, so that we don't tread on each other's feet. I'll do a build for the 3.4.4 one if you don't mind, I need some hands-on practice :)  I'll keep using your tag naming scheme for now, not the one I just proposed.

Cheers,

Jeen



_______________________________________________
rdf4j-dev mailing list
rdf4j-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this list, visit https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/rdf4j-dev

Back to the top