Dear Stephen, again :-) On Sun, 31 May 2020 at 20:30, Stephen Scheck <singularsyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> No, it is how Docker is designed. Maybe the terminology "layer" is >> not the Docker one but when the images are chained, one cannot remove >> the data of the previous layer of the total image. > > I'm not disagreeing with that, but IF any of the store files resulting from > `guix pull` > are ephemeral (i.e. intermediate build results not anchored to a profile) AND > guix > GC worked inside the container, my approach might still work - yes there > would be > image and layers growth but it might be small enough not to care between > periodic image > rebases. But I'm starting to doubt that, or at least it is difficult to > quantify with the > GC issues. Currently, if I read correctly, your images are chained with something like, --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- GUIX_PATH=/root/.config/guix/current/bin $GUIX_PATH/guix pull --branch=$CI_COMMIT_REF_NAME--fallback /root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix gc --delete-generations /root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix gc --collect-garbage /root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix gc --optimize docker commit --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- and instead you should do something like --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- GUIX_PATH=/root/.config/guix/current/bin $GUIX_PATH/guix pull --branch=$CI_COMMIT_REF_NAME--fallback /root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix pull -d /root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix package -d /root/.config/guix/current/bin/guix gc docker commit docker export | docker import --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Maybe the explosion of size would be slower. If you do, please report here the number after say 12 generations; I am really interesting. ;-) >> Because if you run Guix outside an Docker container, you will not have >> the issue. The main issue is how the Docker "filesystem" is designed. > > Actually, there might be another way around this, still avoiding the need for > a custom Runner, > for example mounting /var/guix and /gnu/store into the container instead of > belonging to it. If > done that way, layer accumulation wouldn't be an issue, and maybe GC between > layers neither. Yes, it is one solution. All the question seems to be: - what is the purpose of such Docker image? Which usage? - what infrastructure do you have at hand to build the Docker images? Thank you for raising all this Docker image production question. :-) All the best, simon
