I think these objections really are based on strange premises.
Docker has become the deployment format for applications because packaging at distribution level sucks arse. This has nothing to do with messaging, or do I miss the point here?
The point with scalability is, that scalability becomes modular. Scaling only parts of the application is possible. So you could use your resources more efficient if you have to.
Security is baked in, which means, you could restrict privileges at the application level.
Second: after one year having patches for the whole spectre-meltdown crap, how is this "a virtual machine is more secure than x" an argument at all? Virtual machines weren't any better off. The only "secure" separation - if that makes any sense - is physical separation with only one application running.
The only thing I tend to agree is about 0 downtime deployments.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I think these objections really are based on strange premises.
Docker has become the deployment format for applications because packaging at distribution level sucks arse. This has nothing to do with messaging, or do I miss the point here?
The point with scalability is, that scalability becomes modular. Scaling only parts of the application is possible. So you could use your resources more efficient if you have to.
Security is baked in, which means, you could restrict privileges at the application level.
Second: after one year having patches for the whole spectre-meltdown crap, how is this "a virtual machine is more secure than x" an argument at all? Virtual machines weren't any better off. The only "secure" separation - if that makes any sense - is physical separation with only one application running.
The only thing I tend to agree is about 0 downtime deployments.