Docker vs OpenVZ

Overview

Docker

Stacks194.2K

Followers143.8K

Votes3.9K

OpenVZ

Stacks12

Followers36

Votes0

Docker vs OpenVZ: What are the differences?

Introduction

Docker and OpenVZ are both popular containerization technologies used for virtualization, but they have key differences that set them apart.

Architecture: Docker utilizes a containerization approach at the application level, whereas OpenVZ works at the operating system level with a container-based virtualization solution. Docker containers are isolated from the host system but share the same kernel, while OpenVZ containers have their kernel modules and are more tightly integrated with the host system.
Portability: Docker containers are more portable as they can run on any system that has Docker installed, regardless of the underlying operating system. On the other hand, OpenVZ containers are limited to running on systems that support the OpenVZ kernel.
Resource Management: Docker provides more flexibility in resource management through the use of cgroups and namespaces, allowing users to control CPU, memory, and other resources. OpenVZ offers efficient resource management through its streamlined kernel-level virtualization, providing better performance in some cases.
Overhead and Performance: Docker has less overhead compared to OpenVZ, making it more suitable for lightweight, single-application containers. OpenVZ, due to its OS-level virtualization, may have higher overhead but can offer better performance for applications requiring closer integration with the host system.
Networking: Docker provides network isolation for containers through a virtual bridge and network namespaces. OpenVZ, on the other hand, uses a single network stack for all containers, which can lead to potential security concerns but simplifies network configuration.
Security: Docker is often considered more secure due to its layered approach to containerization and image management. OpenVZ, while also providing isolation, may have security implications if the host OS is compromised, as all containers share the same kernel.

In Summary, Docker and OpenVZ differ in their architecture, portability, resource management, overhead, networking, and security approaches, each offering unique benefits and trade-offs in containerization.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Docker, OpenVZ

Florian

IT DevOp at Agitos GmbH

Oct 22, 2019

Decided

lxd/lxc and Docker aren't congruent so this comparison needs a more detailed look; but in short I can say: the lxd-integrated administration of storage including zfs with its snapshot capabilities as well as the system container (multi-process) approach of lxc vs. the limited single-process container approach of Docker is the main reason I chose lxd over Docker.

483k views483k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Docker	OpenVZ
The Docker Platform is the industry-leading container platform for continuous, high-velocity innovation, enabling organizations to seamlessly build and share any application — from legacy to what comes next — and securely run them anywhere	Virtuozzo leverages OpenVZ as its core of a virtualization solution offered by Virtuozzo company. Virtuozzo is optimized for hosters and offers hypervisor (VMs in addition to containers), distributed cloud storage, dedicated support, management tools, and easy installation.
Integrated developer tools; open, portable images; shareable, reusable apps; framework-aware builds; standardized templates; multi-environment support; remote registry management; simple setup for Docker and Kubernetes; certified Kubernetes; application templates; enterprise controls; secure software supply chain; industry-leading container runtime; image scanning; access controls; image signing; caching and mirroring; image lifecycle; policy-based image promotion	A container (CT) looks and behaves like a regular Linux system. It has standard startup scripts; Software from vendors can run inside a container without OpenVZ-specific modifications or adjustment; A user can change any configuration file and install additional software; Containers are completely isolated from each other (file system, processes, Inter Process Communication (IPC), sysctl variables); Processes belonging to a container are scheduled for execution on all available CPUs
Statistics
Stacks 194.2K	Stacks 12
Followers 143.8K	Followers 36
Votes 3.9K	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 823 Rapid integration and build up 692 Isolation 521 Open source 505 Testability and reproducibility 460 Lightweight Cons 8 New versions == broken features 6 Documentation not always in sync 6 Unreliable networking 4 Moves quickly 3 Not Secure	No community feedback yet
Integrations
Java Docker Compose VirtualBox Linux Amazon EC2 Container Service Docker Swarm boot2docker Kubernetes Docker Machine Vagrant	Python C lang C++

What are some alternatives to Docker, OpenVZ?

LXD

LXD isn't a rewrite of LXC, in fact it's building on top of LXC to provide a new, better user experience. Under the hood, LXD uses LXC through liblxc and its Go binding to create and manage the containers. It's basically an alternative to LXC's tools and distribution template system with the added features that come from being controllable over the network.

LXC

LXC is a userspace interface for the Linux kernel containment features. Through a powerful API and simple tools, it lets Linux users easily create and manage system or application containers.

rkt

Rocket is a cli for running App Containers. The goal of rocket is to be composable, secure, and fast.

Vagrant Cloud

Vagrant Cloud pairs with Vagrant to enable access, insight and collaboration across teams, as well as to bring exposure to community contributions and development environments.

Studio 3T

It's the only MongoDB tool that provides three ways to explore data alongside powerful features like query autocompletion, polyglot code generation, a stage-by-stage aggregation query builder, import and export, SQL query support and more.

SmartOS

It combines the capabilities you get from a lightweight container OS, optimized to deliver containers, with the robust security, networking and storage capabilities you’ve come to expect and depend on from a hardware hypervisor.

Clear Containers

We set out to build Clear Containers by leveraging the isolation of virtual-machine technology along with the deployment benefits of containers. As part of this, we let go of the "generic PC hardware" notion traditionally associated with virtual machines; we're not going to pretend to be a standard PC that is compatible with just about any OS on the planet.

Flatpak

It is a next-generation technology for building and distributing desktop applications on Linux

Lima

It launches Linux virtual machines with automatic file sharing, port forwarding, and containerd. It can be considered as some sort of unofficial "macOS subsystem for Linux", or "containerd for Mac". It is expected to be used on macOS hosts, but can be used on Linux hosts as well. It may work on NetBSD and Windows hosts as well.

Boxfuse

It generates minimal images for your application in seconds. They boot directly on virtual hardware. There is no classic OS and no container runtime.

Related Comparisons

Docker vs OpenVZ: What are the differences?

Introduction

Docker and OpenVZ are both popular containerization technologies used for virtualization, but they have key differences that set them apart.

Architecture: Docker utilizes a containerization approach at the application level, whereas OpenVZ works at the operating system level with a container-based virtualization solution. Docker containers are isolated from the host system but share the same kernel, while OpenVZ containers have their kernel modules and are more tightly integrated with the host system.
Portability: Docker containers are more portable as they can run on any system that has Docker installed, regardless of the underlying operating system. On the other hand, OpenVZ containers are limited to running on systems that support the OpenVZ kernel.
Resource Management: Docker provides more flexibility in resource management through the use of cgroups and namespaces, allowing users to control CPU, memory, and other resources. OpenVZ offers efficient resource management through its streamlined kernel-level virtualization, providing better performance in some cases.
Overhead and Performance: Docker has less overhead compared to OpenVZ, making it more suitable for lightweight, single-application containers. OpenVZ, due to its OS-level virtualization, may have higher overhead but can offer better performance for applications requiring closer integration with the host system.
Networking: Docker provides network isolation for containers through a virtual bridge and network namespaces. OpenVZ, on the other hand, uses a single network stack for all containers, which can lead to potential security concerns but simplifies network configuration.
Security: Docker is often considered more secure due to its layered approach to containerization and image management. OpenVZ, while also providing isolation, may have security implications if the host OS is compromised, as all containers share the same kernel.

Docker vs OpenVZ

Overview

Docker vs OpenVZ: What are the differences?