That's always been the least interesting thing about Docker for me, since Vagrant solves that particular problem much more completely, and has been around a lot longer than Docker has.
Using Docker for this forces you to do things the Docker way, whereas Vagrant is much more OS and CM agnostic. (CM is configuration manager: you can use puppet, chef, ansible, shell, salt or even Docker: whatever you're already using in production).
My current web app is composed of 10 database hosts and 11 REST APIs. 21 VMs would blow my laptop's resources away while 21 containers run just fine. For me, that makes Docker a lot more attractive for local development. Also, Docker removes the need for a CM if you are into stateless deployments.
Comments
That's always been the least interesting thing about Docker for me, since Vagrant solves that particular problem much more completely, and has been around a lot longer than Docker has.
Using Docker for this forces you to do things the Docker way, whereas Vagrant is much more OS and CM agnostic. (CM is configuration manager: you can use puppet, chef, ansible, shell, salt or even Docker: whatever you're already using in production).
My current web app is composed of 10 database hosts and 11 REST APIs. 21 VMs would blow my laptop's resources away while 21 containers run just fine. For me, that makes Docker a lot more attractive for local development. Also, Docker removes the need for a CM if you are into stateless deployments.
If you're running a large number of VM's, vagrant-lxc is awesome, so are offsite targets. (digital ocean, AWS, et cetera)
Vagrant also has more options for stateless deployments than Docker: docker, packer, nixos, et cetera.