Open Stack

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 9:38 PM, Gabriele Cerami <gcerami at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 19 Oct, Sam Yaple wrote:
> > docker_image wouldn't be the best place for that. Buf if you are looking
> > for a quicker solution, kolla_docker was written specifically to be
> license
> > compatible for openstack. its structure should make it easily adapted to
> > delete an image. And you can copy it and cut it up thanks to the license.
>
> Thanks, I'll look into it.
>
> > Are you pushing images with no shared base layers at all (300MB
> compressed
> > image is no shared base layers)? With shared base layers a full image set
> > of Kolla images should be much smaller than the numbers you posted.
>
> 300MB is the rounded size of the size reported by the dockerhub UI
> e.g https://hub.docker.com/r/tripleopike/centos-binary-heat-api/
> shows 265MB for the newest tag. I'm not sure what size is dockerhub
> reporting.
>

This is misleading. For example, you will download 265MB if you download
only tripleopike/centos-binary-heat-api:current-tripleo . But if you
download both tripleopike/centos-binary-heat-api:current-tripleo and
tripleopike/centos-binary-heat-engine:current-tripleo you will have only
downloaded 266MB in total since the majority of those layers are shared.

So it seems tripleo is building *all* images and then pushing them.
Reworking your number leads me to believe you will be consuming 10-15GB in
total on Dockerhub. Kolla images are only the size that you posted when
built as seperate services. Just keep building all the images at the same
time and you wont get anywhere near the numbers you posted.


> When pulling the image, docker downloads 30 layers. The final size
> reported locally is 815MB.
>

This is the uncompressed size, but even here layers are shared.

>
> Thanks
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20171019/e2947cc6/attachment.html>