Alpine collects Docker builds under Python 50 times slower, and images 2 times heavier



Alpine Linux is often recommended as the base image for Docker. You are told that using Alpine will make your builds smaller and the build process faster.

But if you use Alpine Linux for Python applications, then it:

  • Makes your builds much slower
  • Makes your looks bigger
  • Wasting your time
  • And in the end, it can cause runtime errors

Let’s take a look at why Alpine recommends it, but why you shouldn’t use it in a place with Python.

Why do people recommend Alpine?


Let's assume that we need gcc as part of our image and we want to compare Alpine Linux vs Ubuntu 18.04 in terms of build speed and final image size.

To get started, download two images and compare their size:

$ docker pull --quiet ubuntu:18.04
docker.io/library/ubuntu:18.04
$ docker pull --quiet alpine
docker.io/library/alpine:latest
$ docker image ls ubuntu:18.04
REPOSITORY          TAG        IMAGE ID         SIZE
ubuntu              18.04      ccc6e87d482b     64.2MB
$ docker image ls alpine
REPOSITORY          TAG        IMAGE ID         SIZE
alpine              latest     e7d92cdc71fe     5.59MB

As you can see, the base image for Alpine is much smaller. Let's now try installing gcc and start with Ubuntu:

FROM ubuntu:18.04
RUN apt-get update && \
    apt-get install --no-install-recommends -y gcc && \
    apt-get clean && rm -rf /var/lib/apt/lists/*

Writing the perfect Dockerfile is beyond the scope of this article.

Let's measure the build speed:

$ time docker build -t ubuntu-gcc -f Dockerfile.ubuntu --quiet .
sha256:b6a3ee33acb83148cd273b0098f4c7eed01a82f47eeb8f5bec775c26d4fe4aae

real    0m29.251s
user    0m0.032s
sys     0m0.026s
$ docker image ls ubuntu-gcc
REPOSITORY   TAG      IMAGE ID      CREATED         SIZE
ubuntu-gcc   latest   b6a3ee33acb8  9 seconds ago   150MB

Repeat the same for Alpine (Dockerfile):

FROM alpine
RUN apk add --update gcc

We assemble, look at the time and size of the assembly:

$ time docker build -t alpine-gcc -f Dockerfile.alpine --quiet .
sha256:efd626923c1478ccde67db28911ef90799710e5b8125cf4ebb2b2ca200ae1ac3

real    0m15.461s
user    0m0.026s
sys     0m0.024s
$ docker image ls alpine-gcc
REPOSITORY   TAG      IMAGE ID       CREATED         SIZE
alpine-gcc   latest   efd626923c14   7 seconds ago   105MB

As promised, Alpine-based images assemble faster and less by themselves: 15 seconds instead of 30 and image size 105MB versus 150MB. This is pretty good!

But if we switch to building a Python application, then everything is not so rosy.

Python image


Python applications often use pandas and matplotlib. Therefore, one of the options is to take an official Debian-based image using this Dockerfile:

FROM python:3.8-slim
RUN pip install --no-cache-dir matplotlib pandas

We collect it:

$ docker build -f Dockerfile.slim -t python-matpan.
Sending build context to Docker daemon  3.072kB
Step 1/2 : FROM python:3.8-slim
 ---> 036ea1506a85
Step 2/2 : RUN pip install --no-cache-dir matplotlib pandas
 ---> Running in 13739b2a0917
Collecting matplotlib
  Downloading matplotlib-3.1.2-cp38-cp38-manylinux1_x86_64.whl (13.1 MB)
Collecting pandas
  Downloading pandas-0.25.3-cp38-cp38-manylinux1_x86_64.whl (10.4 MB)
...
Successfully built b98b5dc06690
Successfully tagged python-matpan:latest

real    0m30.297s
user    0m0.043s
sys     0m0.020s

We get an image of 363MB in size.
Will we get better with Alpine? Let's try:

FROM python:3.8-alpine
RUN pip install --no-cache-dir matplotlib pandas

$ docker build -t python-matpan-alpine -f Dockerfile.alpine .                                 
Sending build context to Docker daemon  3.072kB                                               
Step 1/2 : FROM python:3.8-alpine                                                             
 ---> a0ee0c90a0db                                                                            
Step 2/2 : RUN pip install --no-cache-dir matplotlib pandas                                                  
 ---> Running in 6740adad3729                                                                 
Collecting matplotlib                                                                         
  Downloading matplotlib-3.1.2.tar.gz (40.9 MB)                                               
    ERROR: Command errored out with exit status 1:                                            
     command: /usr/local/bin/python -c 'import sys, setuptools, tokenize; sys.argv[0] = '"'"'/
tmp/pip-install-a3olrixa/matplotlib/setup.py'"'"'; __file__='"'"'/tmp/pip-install-a3olrixa/matplotlib/setup.py'"'"';f=getattr(tokenize, '"'"'open'"'"', open)(__file__);code=f.read().replace('"'"'\r\n'"'"', '"'"'\n'"'"');f.close();exec(compile(code, __file__, '"'"'exec'"'"'))' egg_info --egg-base /tmp/pip-install-a3olrixa/matplotlib/pip-egg-info                              

...
ERROR: Command errored out with exit status 1: python setup.py egg_info Check the logs for full command output.
The command '/bin/sh -c pip install matplotlib pandas' returned a non-zero code: 1

What's happening?

Alpine does not support wheels


If you look at the build, which is based on Debian, you will see that it downloads matplotlib-3.1.2-cp38-cp38-manylinux1_x86_64. whl .

This is the binary for wheel. Alpine downloads the sources of `matplotlib-3.1.2.tar. gz `, since it does not support standard wheels .

Why? Most Linux distributions use the GNU version (glibc) of the C standard library, which in fact is required by every C program, including Python. But Alpine uses `musl`, and since those binaries are for` glibc`, they are simply not an option.

Therefore, if you use Alpine, you need to compile all the code written in C in each Python package.

Ah, yes, a list of all such dependencies that need to be compiled will have to be searched for ourselves.
In this case, we get this:

FROM python:3.8-alpine
RUN apk --update add gcc build-base freetype-dev libpng-dev openblas-dev
RUN pip install --no-cache-dir matplotlib pandas

And the build time takes ...

... 25 minutes 57 seconds! And the size of the image is 851MB.

Alpine-based images take a lot longer, they themselves are larger and you still need to look for all the dependencies. You can of course reduce the build size using multi-stage builds, but that means more work needs to be done.

That's not all!

Alpine may cause unexpected runtime bugs



Surely these errors have already been fixed, but who knows how many more.

Do not use Alpine images for Python


If you do not want to bother with large and long builds, dependency searches and potential bugs - do not use Alpine Linux as a base image. Choosing a good base image .

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/undefined/


All Articles