Docker vs Podman: Which One Should You Use to Run Your App?

Setting up a home lab server app can be exciting, especially when diving into containerization to manage applications efficiently. Two popular tools, Docker and Podman, stand out for this purpose. This article explores each tool, their pros and cons, and helps you decide which one best suits your home lab server app.

What Is Docker?

Docker is a containerization platform that lets you package applications and their dependencies into containers. These containers operate flawlessly throughout various environments, from a laptop to a home lab server. I have used Docker for all my development projects and apps. Once my app is in a Docker container, I can run it almost anywhere Docker is installed. As long as Docker is present, your app should run consistently.

Features

• Large community and extensive support.
• Intuitive command-line interface (CLI), making it accessible for beginners.
• A large number of official and community-contributed images available for you to use.
• Enables running multiple containers and scaling them easily – great for growing home labs.
• Docker Compose simplifies multi-container setups (e.g., databases + web servers).
• Runs seamlessly on Windows, macOS, and Linux.

Cons

• Docker runs a daemon with root privileges, which can create security risks if not handled properly. This is especially concerning for home labs connected to the internet.
• The daemon consumes additional system resources, which may be a factor for home lab servers with limited power, such as an old desktop.
• Managing multiple containers becomes complex without orchestration tools like Docker Swarm or Kubernetes, which might be overkill for a home lab.
• Docker images can be quite large, especially if not optimized during the build process.

What Is Podman?

Podman is an open-source, Linux-native container management tool developed by Red Hat. It is designed as a secure, lightweight alternative to Docker. I recently tried Podman for a home lab project, and its focus on security stood out – particularly its ability to run containers without requiring root access.

Unlike Docker, Podman manages containers and pods (groups of containers) without using a background daemon. Instead, it leverages the host OS for efficiency and security.

Pros

• Can run containers without root privileges, using user namespaces for isolation – an important feature for home labs with less stringent security controls.
• No background daemon, leading to lower resource consumption and a reduced attack surface – ideal for lightweight home servers.
• Fully compliant with Open Container Initiative (OCI) standards, allowing seamless use of Docker images.
• Includes tools like Buildah for building images and Skopeo for managing them, providing a comprehensive container management suite.
• Supports pods, enabling multiple containers to be grouped together.
• Can generate Kubernetes-compatible YAML files directly from running pods, simplifying integration with Kubernetes environments.

Cons

• Less mature compared to Docker.
• Smaller community and fewer available resources.
• Requires learning new commands if transitioning from Docker.
• While rapidly growing, Podman’s ecosystem is not yet as vast as Docker’s.

Docker vs. Podman

Now, let’s compare these tools in the context of a home lab server app. If you’re running something like a media server (e.g., Plex), a web server, or a development environment, you need a solution that is both secure and easy to manage.

Ease of use

Docker wins in usability due to its well-established CLI and abundant resources. Setting up Docker containers for my home lab was straightforward, thanks to numerous online guides. Podman’s CLI is similar, but some differences – such as managing pods instead of Compose files -require adjustment.

Winner: Docker

Security

Podman excels in security with its rootless and daemonless architecture. In a home lab setup, where the server might be exposed to the internet, this is crucial. Running containers without root privileges significantly reduces risk if something goes wrong.

Furthermore, Docker overrides UFW and automatically expose containers ports to the internet that poses a security risk. Podman, on the other hand, requires you to manually configure firewall rules, offering more control but demanding careful security setup by the user.

Winner: Podman

Resource efficiency

Podman’s daemonless nature results in lower resource consumption, making it ideal for home lab servers with limited hardware, such as an old laptop or Raspberry Pi. While Docker’s daemon isn’t excessively heavy, it does introduce some overhead, which could be a concern in resource-constrained environments.

Winner: Podman

Compatibility

Both tools support OCI-compliant images, allowing Docker images to be used with Podman. However, certain Docker-specific features – such as Docker Compose – may require workarounds in Podman.

Winner: Tie

Community and support

Docker continues to lead in terms of community size and available resources. However, Podman, backed by Red Hat, is rapidly growing its ecosystem.

Winner: Docker, for now.

Final Thoughts

Docker and Podman are both powerful containerization tools, each with unique strengths. Docker is widely recognized for its ease of use and extensive community support, making it an excellent choice for beginners or those who prefer a well-established platform.

When I set up my home lab, I initially used Docker for its simplicity. I ran a Jellyfin media server and a Pi-hole, and it worked seamlessly.

Podman, on the other hand, prioritizes security with its rootless and daemonless design – an advantage for home lab environments. For most home lab server apps, I’d recommend Podman due to its security benefits. However, if you’re already comfortable with Docker, there’s no instant need to change. Both tools can efficiently manage a home lab setup, whether it’s running a media server, a web app, or a development environment.

Image credit: Ian Taylor via Unsplash. All alterations and screenshots by Haroon Javed.