The supposed performance gains from monolithic kernel being wasted on features that mimic microkernel features.
So two things:
1. Containers don't have a meaningful performance hit. (They are semi-frequently used with things that can have a perf hit, like overlay filesystems, but this is generally easy to skip when it matters.)
2. I don't think containers meaningfully mimic microkernel features. If I run everything on my laptop in a container, and a device driver crashes, then the machine is still hosed.
Comments
Those containers run on a monolithic kernel; what's your point?
The supposed performance gains from monolithic kernel being wasted on features that mimic microkernel features.
So two things:
1. Containers don't have a meaningful performance hit. (They are semi-frequently used with things that can have a perf hit, like overlay filesystems, but this is generally easy to skip when it matters.)
2. I don't think containers meaningfully mimic microkernel features. If I run everything on my laptop in a container, and a device driver crashes, then the machine is still hosed.
1. The amount of memory consumption I see, versus traditional processes, must be a mirage.
2. It depends on what the containers are being used for. Microkernels aren't only about using drivers in userspace.
And still manage to run better than a complete microkernel
So goes the mythological tales from ancient times.
That is what happens when people don't update themselves.