-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 50
Open
Description
I was asked why I prefer micromamba-docker over continuum/miniconda3.
Miniconda shows this very simple command on their readme, i love it:
docker run -i -t -p 8888:8888 continuumio/miniconda3 /bin/bash -c "\
conda install jupyter -y --quiet && \
mkdir -p /opt/notebooks && \
jupyter notebook \
--notebook-dir=/opt/notebooks --ip='*' --port=8888 \
--no-browser --allow-root"
No need for dockerfile, just run this snippet.
Among the advantages for micromamba are:
- much smaller image
- wide variety of base images (alpine, ubuntu, cuda, ...)
- no annoying default base environment
- no annoying default channels
I tested speed, and indeed it is! I think you could add this to the docs to show a) how simple it is to use the container, and b) that it is more performant than miniconda
Micromamba:
docker run -i -t mambaorg/micromamba /bin/bash -c "\
time micromamba install -yn base -c bioconda -c conda-forge python=3.10 nextclade -y --quiet && bash"
real 0m9.570s
user 0m9.574s
sys 0m3.865s
docker run -i -t -p 8888:8888 continuumio/miniconda3 /bin/bash -c "\
time conda install -yn base -c bioconda -c conda-forge python=3.10 nextclade -y --quiet && bash"
real 0m22.089s
user 0m14.953s
sys 0m3.726s
In addition this, the pull time is of course much shorter for micromamba (20 seconds for miniconda on 100Mbps, vs 3 seconds for micromamba)
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels