Fine, but then that's your reason. "until there's a security vuln in an end-of-life piece of core software...and then it's a 4+ week slog of building a new server" isn't a difference in the context of comparing Xen VMs and lxd containers. As an aside, lxd does support cgroup memory slicing. It has the advantage that it's not mandatory like it is in VMs, but you can do it if you want it.
> Would rather use Docker for containers because the whole container ecosystem is built around it.
This makes no sense. You're hearing the word "container" and inferring an equivalence that does not exist. The "whole container ecosystem" is something that exists for Docker-style containers, and is entirely irrelevant for lxd containers.
lxd containers are equivalent to full systems, and exist in the "Use one big server" ecosystem. If you're familiar with running a full system into a VM, then you're familiar with the inside of a lxd container. They're the same. In userspace, there's no significant difference.
Fine, but then that's your reason. "until there's a security vuln in an end-of-life piece of core software...and then it's a 4+ week slog of building a new server" isn't a difference in the context of comparing Xen VMs and lxd containers. As an aside, lxd does support cgroup memory slicing. It has the advantage that it's not mandatory like it is in VMs, but you can do it if you want it.
> Would rather use Docker for containers because the whole container ecosystem is built around it.
This makes no sense. You're hearing the word "container" and inferring an equivalence that does not exist. The "whole container ecosystem" is something that exists for Docker-style containers, and is entirely irrelevant for lxd containers.
lxd containers are equivalent to full systems, and exist in the "Use one big server" ecosystem. If you're familiar with running a full system into a VM, then you're familiar with the inside of a lxd container. They're the same. In userspace, there's no significant difference.