Bk docker image?


#1

Hello,

Has anyone successfully created a docker image of bitkeeper?


#2

Not that I am aware. I assume you are talking a docker image of just the
bkd service that shares a local directory of repositories. It doesn’t seem
that this would be too difficult.


#3

I played with Docker on my Mac for a couple of days and built bk on a dev docker image and from harboured fantasies of just what (I think) you’re asking for… wasn’t hard but I got distracted by life and it’s now lost.

As a first cut, I would just start with a basic docker image and just install our pre-built binaries.

One thing that I didn’t actually do was think about having a separate image/disk/volume that the bk-docker could use to store repositories. I think that, long term, you would definitely want to separate the bkd function from the storage of repositories.


#4

@wscott, @georgn thanks both for the revert, yes, it was not so difficult to do in fact.
What I wanted to know is if anyone has some further experience on the usage, if there are any major issues and so on, on the “dockerized” environment. Or if any special tuning…
Right now I made an image using a bitkeeper I installed on CentOS7


#5

BK is pretty basic, it doesn’t need much in the way of tuning. About the only thing I remember is if you have lots of repositories (and I mean lots, like hundreds or thousands of clones) that you are serving up, you will get better performance if you do NOT hard link them. So if you log into your VM and are creating clones use --no-hardlinks.

Why? Long story but the short version is that the file system gets fragmented by the hardlinks. I can go into the details if you like.