Skip to main content

Rootconf 2014 Review

Bad points to start with

Rootconf 2014 was filled with topics about docker. The speech selectors should have reduced the talks about docker as most of them are very much redundant

Then came the highlight of all, most of the talks compared their feature on traditional virtual machines, docker and lxc. For God's sake docker and lxc are the same technology with docker being a wrapper around lxc. Docker allows remote creation of containers. I personally like aufs rootfs of docker. Docker differs from lxc by principles. Docker's Philosophy is isolation of processes as separate containers. So based on use case select any one of them. If a system runs docker it can run lxc and they aren't entirely different technologies.

Good take away points are


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How we have systematically improved the roads our packets travel to help data imports and exports flourish

This blog post is an account of how we have toiled over the years to improve the throughput of our interDC tunnels. I joined this company around 2012. We were scaling aggressively then. We quickly expanded to 4 DCs with a mixture of AWS and colocation. Our primary DC is connected to all these new DCs via IPSEC tunnels established from SRX. The SRX model we had, had an IPSEC throughput of 350Mbps. Around December 2015 we saturated the SRX. Buying SRX was an option on the table. Buying one with 2Gbps throughput would have cut the story short. The tech team didn't see it happening. I don't have an answer to the question, "Is it worth spending time in solving a problem if a solution is already available out of box?" This project helped us in improving our critical thinking and in experiencing the theoretical network fundamentals on live traffic, but also caused us quite a bit of fatigue due to management overhead. Cutting short the philosophy, lets jump to the story.

The server, me and the conversation

We were moving a project from AWS to our co-located DC. We have setup KVMs scheduled by Cloudstack for each of the component in the architecture. The KVMs used local storage. The VMs are provisioned with more than required resources because we have the opinion that in our DC scaling during peak load and then downscaling doesn't offer much benefits financially as we are anyways paying for the hardware in advance and its also powered on. Its going to be idle if not used. Now we found something interesting our latency in co-located DC was 2 times more than in AWS. The time for first byte at our load balancer in aws was 60ms average and at our DC was 112ms. We started our debugging mission, Mission Conquer-AWS. All the servers are newer Dell hardwares. So the initially intuition was virtualisation is causing the issue. Conversation with the Hypervisor We started with CPU optimisation, we started using the host-passthrough mode of CPU in libvirt so VMs dont see QEMU emulated CPUs,

Ptrace

Ptrace is a nice setup ( some people call dirty setup) on linux to debug running processes. This ptrace in sys/ptrace.h is used by strace and gdb. To trace a child process, the child process should call PTRACE_TRACEME. The kernel during each system call(or execution of each instruction) checks if the process is traced. If it is traced, it issues a SIGTRAP, the parent process if in wait() state, will get a signal. The parent issues a SIGSTOP to hold current state of child and can access the registers and memory of child using PEEKDATA and alter the values in register and memory using POKEDATA. Once the required job is done, parent will allow the child to run with a SIGCONT signal. Since one can access registers, the next instruction to be executed can be easily found using instruction pointer, this comes in handy when we need to set breakpoints while debugging. The entire code base can also be changed using ptrace. PTRACE_ATTACH attaches a running process. It does some hack to become