AFIK it’s only NVIDIA that allows containers shared access to a GPU on the host.
This cannot be right. I'm pretty sure that it is possible to run OpenCL applications in containers that are sharing a GPU.
I should test this if I have time. My plan was to use a distrobox container since that shares the GPU by default and run something like lc0 to see if opencl acceleration works.
Now where is my remindme bot? (I won't have time).
18 points.
I've owned a dictionary and an encyclopedia.
It's worked fine for me with no configuration. If you ask for help, we can troubleshoot and get it working.
Wish I could transcend into declarativity but the thread’s nix survivor ratio is grim
Yeah lol.
I will say, that for my server, I decided to use kubernetes + fluxcd for declaratively. My entire kubernetes "state" is declared in a git repo, and this is the popular, industry standard for things like this, called GitOps. It makes it very easy to add an app, since it's just adding a folder + some new config files. And unlike Nix, Kubernetes and Flux are very well documented with much tooling as well. Nix doesn't really have a working LSP or good code autocomplete, but with kubernetes, I can just start typing in a yaml file and then hit tab and it spits out the template for me. Code autocompletion with kubernetes feels much more similar to the tooling of other, more mature tooling
It's not as declarative as nix though. There are things missing, like OCI containers could theoretically shift if you don't rely on hashes and some other nitpicks. But declarativity is a spectrum, and I feel like, outside of scientific scenarios (think simulations where versioning, hardware, runtime etc being the same is very important), I think many non-nixos solutions are declarative enough.
OP seems to be trying to install older projects, rather than creating a new project.
I found this: https://github.com/tenclass/mvisor-win-vgpu-driver
But it is for another foss kvm based hypervisor called mvisor.
What made it better?
If I run two mysql containers, it won't necessarily take twice the resources of a single mysql containers
It's complicated, but essentially, no.
Docker images, are built in layers. Each layer is a step in the build process. Layers that are identical, are shared between containers to the point of it taking up the ram of only running the layer once.
Although, it should be noted that docker doesn't load the whole container into memory, like a normal linux os. Unused stuff will just sit on your disk, just like normal. So rather, binaries or libraries loaded twice via two docker containers will only use up the ram of one instance. This is similar to how shared libraries reduce ram usage.
Docker only has these features, deduplication, if you are using overlayfs or aufs, but I think overlayfs is the default.
Should you run more than one database container? Well I dunno how mysql scales. If there is performance benefit from having only one mysqld instance, then it's probably worth it. Like, if mysql uses up that much ram regardless of what databases you have loaded in a way that can't be deduplicated, then you'd definitely see a benefit from a single container.
What if your services need different database versions, or even software? Then different database containers is probably better.
Nginx and nginx proxy manager are two different things, although nginx proxy manager uses nginx underneath the hodd.
Nginx is a lightweight reverse proxy and http(s) server configured via config files.
Nginx proxy manager is a docker container that runs nginx, but also had a webui on top of it to make it much, much easier to configure.
Sometimes abbreviated as NPM.
https://nginxproxymanager.com/
That's why people keep asking you for your nginx config since when you just say nginx, people are expecting that you are using just nginx, and configuring it through text files.
Can you elaborate on what you found lacking in kasm? Because afaik, kasm is one of the best solutions for this, giving you a full desktop session inside a docker container.
The SSPL requires that all software used to deploy SSPL software is open sourced. If I deploy my software on Windows, do I have to provide the source code for Windows? What about the proprietary hardware drivers, or Intel Management Engine?
The SSPL is not the next generation of licenses, it is effectively unusable. And both Redis and Mongo, dual licensed their software as the SSPL, and a proprietary license — effectively making their entire software proprietary.
Except Redis, and Mongo were making money. They had well valued, well earning SAAS offerings — it's just that the offerings integrated into existing cloud vendors would be more popular (because vendor lock in). They just wanted more money, and were hoping that by going proprietary, they could force customers away from the cloud offers to themselves, and massively increase their revenue.. They did not get that.
Another thing is that it's not "stealing" Mongo/Redis' when cloud vendors offer SAAS's of Mongo/Redis. Mongo/Redis, and their SAAS offerings, are only possible because the same cloud vendors put more money than Mongo/Redis make yearly into Linux and other software that powers the SAAS offerings of Mongo/Redis, like Kubernetes. Without that software, Mongo/Redis wouldn't have a SAAS offering at all.
I definitely think that it's bad when a piece of software doesn't get any funding it needs to develop, especially when it powers much more modern software, like XZ. But Mongo/Redis weren't suffering from a lack of funding at all. They're just mad they had to share their toys, and tried to take them away. But it didn't even matter in the end.