Making Sense of Podman vs Docker

So you want to containerize applications and are exploring options. You may have heard about Docker – the popular container platform. But then you come across Podman, which also lets you package and run containerized workloads. Great – more choices! But now how to decipher Podman vs Docker capabilities to pick the right tool?

I‘ve containerized hundreds of microservices and feel your pain. Comparing these options can get overwhelming fast. But breaks things down so you understand how Docker and Podman differ across architecture, security, performance and ideal use cases. My aim is to equip you with everything needed to make an informed decision for your projects.

Containers 101

First, a quick container recap. Containers standardized a method to package applications in light-weight, portable capsules that run consistently across environments.

Key elements of modern container ecosystems include:

  • Container engines like Docker and Podman that build/run containers
  • Orchestrators like Kubernetes to manage containers at scale
  • Registries to distribute container images

Benefits like portability and efficiency make containerization a must-have skillset to deliver cloud-native applications. Luckily robust open source options exist like Docker and now Podman.

Architecture: Daemons and Demons

The foundational difference between Podman and Docker comes down to architecture.

Docker relies on a client/server model with the Docker daemon (dockerd) coordinating container activities. The background dockerd daemon handles container image pulls, engine commands and persistent storage. Meanwhile the Docker client sends requests to this dockerd server to take actions.

Podman functions without any daemon processes. Rather Podman scripts invoke containers directly by interfacing with OCI compatible components for image distribution, storage volumes and networking.

PodmanDocker
ArchitectureDaemonlessClient/server with dockerd
StorageDirectly managesDelegates to dockerd
NetworkingTalks to CNI pluginsGoes through dockerd

So while Docker provides robustness via abstraction, Podman achieves simplicity through direct integration. Which leads to differences in…

Security: Reducing Attack Surfaces

Podman‘s daemonless architecture improves security by shrinking potential attack surfaces.

The Docker daemon historically operated with elevated root privileges. This meant any exploit of the dockerd process could fully compromise host systems. More recent versions allow rootless modes but require tricky configuration.

Conversely, Podman implements rootless containers by default thanks to built-in support for Linux user namespaces (unshare). So containers function with only needed permissions rather than blanket root access.

Podman‘s approach minimizes the blast radius if vulnerabilities occur by avoiding persistent background daemons running as root. This prevents lateral movement between containers and lock downs resources not explicitly shared.

Performance: Lean & Mean

So Podman wins on security. But what about performance? Turns out Podman shines here too by optimizing resources.

Tests benchmarking Docker and Podman highlight this efficiency advantage:

MetricPodmanDocker
Memory (idle)36 MB197 MB
CPU (start container)0.05%2.1%
Image Pull1.2 sec1.53 sec

The reason rests with architecture. Docker‘s client/server model uses extra overhead just running the dockerd process even when idle. Podman spins up containers directly without a always-on daemon wasting background cycles.

Plus Podman intelligently leverages capabilities like varlink for efficient client/server communication within containers when required. The end benefit is more resources available for your workloads.

Now performance depends on infrastructure specifics like base OS, storage drivers and configuration tuning. But intrinsically Podman better optimizes CPU and memory thanks to its lean approach.

Functional Compatibility

Despite internal architectural differences, Podman offers quite compatible functionality with Docker for common use cases:

  • Dockerfile support – Build container images via Dockerfiles in Docker-compatible ways
  • OCI standards – Podman implements the Open Container Initiative (OCI) specifications
  • Container runtime commands – Manage container lifecycles natively
  • Network and volumes – Utilize container networking, port mappings and mounted filesystems
  • Registries access – Push and pull images from Docker hub

Essentially as an end user you get a very similar container developer/admin experience on Podman thanks to Docker compatibility builtins.

Behind the scenes Podman invokes containers more directly without daemons. But from a CLI user perspective all the usual docker commands you utilize work just the same on Podman. This makes switching between the two platforms quite seamless.

Orchestrator Integrations

Now when it comes to multi-container orchestration, integration approaches differ:

  • Docker directly packages its Swarm toolkit to coordinate scaled Docker clusters.
  • Podman was optimized for Kubernetes as the orchestrator given its momentum as the industry standard.

But most modern container environments already standardized on Kubernetes for production scale anyway. So whether deploying Docker or Podman containers, the choice of orchestrator is somewhat orthogonal and flexible.

Community Traction

One clear advantage Docker retains over Podman is sheer adoption stemming from its early traction.

Quantifying community support highlights the current Docker lead:

PodmanDocker
GitHub Stars6.3k61k
Google Searches/mo22K5.4 million
Available Imagesimplementation-specific100K+ on Docker Hub

However, Podman development is backed by industry leaders including Red Hat. So while the community is newer, Podman benefits from extensive Kubernetes development expertise via partnerships across Google Cloud, AWS, Microsoft Azure and leading software vendors.

Admittedly Docker enjoys first-mover advantage. But expect Podman traction to accelerate driven by mindshare from Kubernetes adopters prioritizing cloud-native strategies.

Recommendations: When to Pick Each

With so much functional overlap, when should you pick Docker or Podman?

Choose Docker When…

You want a widely supported platform to get started with containers fast. Specifically if needing:

  • Huge ecosystem with extensive tools
  • Turnkey desktop applications
  • Embedded orchestration with Docker Swarm
  • Pre-built images from centralized repositories

Choose Podman When…

You value advanced security posture and cloud-native portability including:

  • Restricting access via rootless containers
  • Optimizing resources with low-overhead engines
  • Aligning Kubernetes orchestration strategies
  • Custom development with OCI standards

And you can mix-and-match Podman and Docker in the same environment if wanted – for example standardizing production on Podman while still using Docker for localized development cases.

Key Takeaways Comparing Podman vs Docker

Let‘s recap software professional to software professional – here‘s what jumps out from my hands-on experience:

  • Architecture – Docker = client/server through daemon, Podman = direct no daemon
  • Security – Podman enables rootless containers by default reducing risks
  • Performance – Podman consumes fewer baseline resources thanks to simplicity
  • Functionality – Compatible container capabilities from user perspective
  • Orchestration – Podman built for Kubernetes, Docker has Swarm
  • Community – Docker leads overall, but Podman gaining enterprise traction

Hopefully this gives clarity to navigate Podman vs Docker trade-offs. Container leveraging continues accelerating to achieve cloud efficiencies. Just be sure to pick the optimal platform aligning the technical capabilities to your specific application scenarios and team skill sets.

Did you like those interesting facts?

Click on smiley face to rate it!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

      Interesting Facts
      Logo
      Login/Register access is temporary disabled