What is your Heroku Cloud Native Buildpacks Experience? #6
hone
started this conversation in
Experiences
Replies: 7 comments 40 replies
What did you do?Here's my experience trying to get https://github.com/codetriage/codetriage running on the Heroku Ruby buildpack: Build outputWhat went well:Dependencies installed as expected What could be better: DatabaseThe app has no
For example, this works: https://gist.github.com/schneems/95b9387a613f4934f30f8508ef8014d8 It works! 
What could be better: JemallocThe app depends on jemalloc, it would be nice to have it on the system, or an easy way to add it. The above command shouldn't need the Do you have any questions?Less a question, more of a comment. Maybe we want to show how to expose and connect to a local database connection (or connection in another docker container) in the docs. |
0 replies
|
Thanks for releasing this! I always loved the simplicity of a Heroku build and the auto-detection of various tools in the process. I have a small app that I tested this on and wanted to see the differences in the final image output. The biggest thing I was looking for was the size of the final image which makes it faster and easier to deal with deployment and various other tasks. What did you do?Stumbled on @schneems's article https://www.schneems.com/2024/05/01/build-a-ruby-on-rails-application-image-in-5-minutes-no-dockerfile-required/ From there: installed pack, set heroku/builder:22 as the default, packed the app. Build outputWhat went well?From the output it looks like the build went as expected, running it again utilizes some caching and reports that it successfully built the image. The build detected ruby, bundler, asset compilation which was great. What could be better?I then looked at the final image size to see the difference in size from my previously Docker built image. The pack image is 879mb, my Docker based image is 573mb. The other thing I noticed is that the image age is 44 years ago. The creation time on various other images that I've recently built is correct. Do you have any questions?
|
21 replies
|
One more(probably naive) question, is there anything related to a custom post-pack cleanup/removal to help reduce the image size? |
|
@nickhammond Thanks for thinking of integration. I've thought/wondered what Kamal integration might look like, but haven't explored that space much (focused on getting the preview out). There are also other tools such as "kuby" CLI which was demo-d at the last RailsConf in portland https://github.com/smartive/kuby (but looks like development has slowed/stopped). I'm not comfortable with the current state to push "This should be the new default" for any tool, but I think it's certainly a good time to start thinking about integration and raising awareness now. Regarding cleanup/removal I opened this discussion #21. I mentioned in this note on Lobste.rs about customizing builds with buildpacks https://lobste.rs/s/fgrffn/docker_without_dockerfile_build_ruby_on#c_4tql12. They had the desire to run a cleanup script. In the long term I would like to see something like a |
|
@schneems Agreed on it not being the new default yet but it'd be a great additional option in my opinion. I'm in the Kamal Discord and I see all of the GitHub discussions that come through and a good chunk of them are related to their Docker builds. Obviously, packs will introduce their own new set of issues but there's a lot of convention over configuration happening with packs vs. Dockerfile-based builds. Picking up I'll try and take a look at the CNB API next week if I have some time. Thanks for working on Heroku-24 and ARM support, appreciate it! |
|
@schneems Is it possible to set labels within project.toml? I found this placeholder doc page https://buildpacks.io/docs/for-buildpack-authors/how-to/write-buildpacks/add-labels/. Kamal checks that the image metadata contains |
|
Moved the Kamal discussion over to the correct place basecamp/kamal#795. |
|
I've been working on buildpack integration for Kamal and I built a few demo apps that utilize Heroku's buildpacks and it worked great! Here's where I mention them: basecamp/kamal#916 (comment) And then here are the demo app repos: kamal-buildpacks-node I'm building the buildpacks via Kamal but it's just shell'ing out to the pack CLI. The two things that would be great to figure out a more native solution to would be:
|
0 replies
|
@nickhammond thanks for your interest and work here. When I looked into Kamal when it was created I always imagine CNBs would be a great fit for it. It's exciting to see this may land 🤞.
This has been brought up before. I forget why we decided against doing it. It'd be worth opening an issue or bringing it up in our slack channel.
Thanks for opening this! |
1 reply
|
@hone Thanks for chiming in on the Kamal PR! I've been loving using buildpacks with Kamal and I think there's just a few details to work through and then we should be all set. Thanks for maintaining buildpacks! I mention the image labels being a native option because we have to inject a buildpack that you didn't specify as part of your build which feels a little off, this line specifically: The .dockerignore/project.toml part is easy enough to explain in docs but I think would really improve the user experience. I'm also just curious as to when you would not want to listen to .dockerignore or is there a standard container ignore file since there are obviously other options outside of Docker that can run an image. (Sorry for the multiple pings, bad hotel wifi) |
|
I was hoping to add a buildpack from Heroku's elements directory to the Here's an example. Say we want to use the I understand why this is failing but wanted to discuss a couple of things:
|
0 replies
|
Unable to build my project neither |
18 replies
|
This discussion(#15) gets into this a bit. The assumption being that you should be able to run |
|
@nickhammond you just need to set the entrypoint to the CNB lifecycle launcher which sets up the environment for you. |
|
@hone |
|
@nickhammond yeah, I'm mostly speaking how it works from the spec side. heroku buildpacks can provide convenience process types, but I also know we've gotten flak for doing that in the past on the Heroku platform of having extra process types that people may not use. @garry-t It will launch whatever command you pass to it. The CNB Lifecycle launcher just sets up the environment so things like the |
|
Kamal just released a new version(2.7.0) that adds support for buildpacks. I did a comparison of using Heroku buildpacks vs. the default Dockerfile that comes with Rails. It's awesome to see the Heroku 24 builder coming in under the default Dockerfile build in the final image size, not by much but a big improvement over Heroku 22, nice work! |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Thank you for checking our project out!
It's always a challenge as an open source project to find out how people are using your project out in the wild. We'd love to hear from you and your use case.
Let us know by adding a comment to this discussion.
Please provide as much detail as possible. You can hide unwieldy or long build output by using the details tag if you like.
All reactions