pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

[Bug 1109] fuzzy container hex-id naming leads to nondeterminism

To: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Bug 1109] fuzzy container hex-id naming leads to nondeterminism
From: bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 02:49:20 +0000
Auto-submitted: auto-generated
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <bug-1109-835@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-1109-835@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/bugzilla/>

Comment # 6 on bug 1109 from
> It's an important usability issue, it absolutely must match Docker
> behaviour.  The whole point of the fuzzy matching is to provide the
> behaviour that users expect

According to a little experiment here, docker-1.6 (f21) actually behaves
in the way that I proposed: ambiguous container prefixes are rejected.
Try:

% for i in `seq 20`       
do
docker run --rm busybox sleep 128 </dev/null &
done

over and over until you get some containers with the same first-two bytes 0xAB.
Then try

% docker inspect AB

you will see docker reject it.  Then do:

% docker kill ABFIRST ABSECOND # but not ABLAST

Then wait a moment, then

% docker inspect AB

will now be accepted and describe ABLAST.  I haven't inspected docker golang
code to confirm.


> (same reason why a docker: prefix on all name was never going to fly).

Then you suffer collisions between docker and non-docker container
namespaces: something irrelevant to docker end-users but significant
to a sysadmin with both lxc & docker on the system.

(Again I don't mind heuristics, but they should be unambiguous.)


You are receiving this mail because:
  • You are on the CC list for the bug.
  • You are the assignee for the bug.
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>