Docker vs. HashiCorp Packer

You are going to be able to find the most resources and examples using Docker whenever you are working with a container orchestration software like Kubernetes. There will always some entropy when you run in a container, a containerized application will never be as purely performant as an app running directly on the OS. However, in most scenarios this loss will be negligible to the time saved in deployment, monitoring, etc.

Incentivized

We use packer to generate new machine images for multiple platforms on every change to our Configuration Management tools like Chef/Puppet/Ansible It's act single tool for Image building for Multi-provider like AWS/Azure/GCP Helps to achieve Dev/Prod Parity Packer itself doesn't have a state like Terraform. You can't do packer output AMI ID. If you have a scenario where you want to maintain the state for images it would be tough to manage via Packer.

Incentivized

• Packaging of application to limit the space occupied
• Ease of running the application
• Provide multiple ways to handle the application issues and integration of different components like pipeline, ansible, terraform etc

• Multi-provider portability
• Greater testability
• Super fast infrastructure deployment

Incentivized

• Docker hub image retention policy can be relaxed
• Docker hub policies can be more developer friendly
• Docker CLI help section can be improved
• Image and container storage (local) management can be optimized

Incentivized

• Manageability
• Manageability
• Manageability

Incentivized

We are happy with the use of Packer in our organization. Apart from manageability, I don't find any other drawback with Packer.

Incentivized

Very easy to use, great tutorials, documentation and cheat sheets out there to help you become a Docker Wiz

Incentivized

It's best for building Image with many features and benefits.

Incentivized

Haven't seen any outages, fatal/unrecoverable errors in my usage so far. Enough said.

Incentivized

Docker Desktop. The CPU high usage is a known issue. Needs fixing. Otherwise, it is great overall. Would not use anything else still.

Incentivized

I only once required support and it was very smooth.

Incentivized

I haven't found any issue in Implementation that itself describes how well this tool is built.

Incentivized

The reason why we are still using Docker right now is due to that is the best among its peers and suits our needs the best. However, the trend we foresee for the future might indicate Amazon lambda could potentially fit our needs to code enviornmentless in the near future.

Incentivized

There are lot of tools in market which does the job for Image creation but all of them are not complete Machine/Image as a code. All other alternatives can create Image partially. Main reason for selecting Packer are Packer is lightweight, portable, and command-line driven Packer helps keep development, staging, and production as similar as possible. Packer automates the creation of any type of machine image Multi-provider portability is the feature to die for

Incentivized

It is the only tool in our toolset that has not [had] any issues so far. That is really a mark of reliability, and it's a testimony to how well the product is made, and a tool that does its job well is a tool well worth having. It is the base tool that I would say any organisation must have if they do scalable deployment.

Incentivized

• Reduces the number of virtual machine which impacted our quarterly billing
• Using docker with proxy we run multiple application on same port on same host.
• impact on billing is we have to provide docker training to the people who are working on it.

• Super fast infrastructure deployment
• Quick turnaround of infrastructure in multiple cloud using single tool.
• Increase productivity by reducing time in infrastructure building.

Incentivized