Sure but the deployment issue is orchestration.  The distribution of functionality works along the available resources. The example machine Sven mentioned (32 cores, 96 MB) is worth nothing if you have a lot of instances and spindle hard discs. It is an act of finding the balance that uses the maximum of all resources. You just need to decrease the role of the weakest link. Modern containers are just about making it comfortable but not solving the "real" problems.

My 2 cents,

Norbert

Am 30.11.2015 um 22:52 schrieb "phil@highoctane.be" <phil@highoctane.be>:

Yes but are they working as nicely on Macs and Win boxes running Dockermachine?

Phil

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:48 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
LXC/LXD containers are much nicer, IMHO, as they look and feel like a regular VM, yet are way more efficient.

> On 30 Nov 2015, at 21:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Do you have a recipe to put Pharo in a Docker container?
> Esteban A. Maringolo
>
>
> 2015-11-30 17:34 GMT-03:00 phil@highoctane.be <phil@highoctane.be>:
>> I have been using Pharo somewhat less in my current projects.
>>
>> Nevertheless, I needed a tool done fast and behaving correctly.
>>
>> Did it the TDD way with Pharo.
>>
>> Great experience. Great productivity. No messing around with external
>> libraries, modules...
>>
>> 64-bit Linux compatibility would really help these days. But stuffing Pharo
>> and 32 bit on a docker container works nicely too.
>>
>> Phil
>