{"id":162,"date":"2016-06-21T15:30:35","date_gmt":"2016-06-21T15:30:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/redmonk.com\/fryan\/?p=162"},"modified":"2016-06-21T15:40:46","modified_gmt":"2016-06-21T15:40:46","slug":"container-trends-plans-orchestration-and-ci-a-dataset-from-bitnami","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/redmonk.com\/fryan\/2016\/06\/21\/container-trends-plans-orchestration-and-ci-a-dataset-from-bitnami\/","title":{"rendered":"Container Trends: Plans, Orchestration and CI \u2013 A Dataset from Bitnami"},"content":{"rendered":"

Over the last week we have had the opportunity to work with a large set of data collected by Bitnami<\/a> (full disclosure: Bitnami<\/a> is a RedMonk<\/a> client). Bitnami collected this data by means of a user survey across their entire user base, and the survey garnered over 5,000 responses from a request sent to Bitnami’s e-mail distribution list\u00a0of over 850K. With any data set of this nature, it is important to state that survey results strictly reflect the members of the Bitnami e-mail distribution list.<\/p>\n

The data set covered areas including container usage and plans, orchestration tools where containers were being used, CI tools and database choices. For this post we will be focusing on the data around containers and CI.<\/p>\n

What makes this data very interesting is the number of companies who are actively using and evaluating containers versus those that are not. One of the issues with many surveys of container users is the automatic bias inherent in the selection criteria. While this data does not eliminate this bias, it does provide some interesting counter balances.<\/p>\n

The Population<\/h2>\n

The overall population breaks out with just over 30% individual developers and the remainder as employees in companies of varying sizes.\u00a0For the purposes\u00a0of this analysis we will ignore individual participants, and focus on four sets of users, looking first at those using or planning to use containers.<\/p>\n