Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
staex.io | ||
| | | | |
blog.hypriot.com
|
|
| | | | | ||
| | | | |
www.ardanlabs.com
|
|
| | | | | Series Index Reducing Image Size Details Specific To Different Languages Going Farther To Reduce Image Size Introduction In the first two parts of this series, we covered the most common methods to optimize Docker image size. We saw how multi-stage builds, combined with Alpine-based images, and sometimes static builds, would generally give us the most dramatic savings. In this last part, we will see how to go even farther. We will talk about standardizing base images, stripping binaries, assets optimization, and other build systems or add-ons like DockerSlim or Bazel, as well as the NixOS distribution. | |
| | | | |
enix.io
|
|
| | | | | This serie of articles deals with solutions for Docker image size optimization. In this first part, we talk about *multi-stage build*. We also explain differences between static and dynamic libraries and why it matters. We also describe the use of the famous Alpine Linux distribution. | |
| | | | |
pythonspeed.com
|
|
| | | Once you understand generic Docker multi-stage builds, here's how to implement them for Python applications, with virtualenvs or user installs. | ||
