Forum Discussion
AMA: Host vs container version compatibility
- Dec 05, 2017
Ah, understood. In the release of WS2016, our recommendation was to have matching host/container build and revision numbers. For example, consider a build with the value 10.0.14393.1944 (major/minor/build/revision). 14393 in this case is the build number for WS2016.
In 1709 we've relaxed this recommendation a little bit. Just so long as the host/container build numbers are the same (14393, 16299, etc), the revision numbers can differ. So in this case, for a host running 10.0.16299.125, it's ok to run a container with version 10.0.16299.19. Notice how the build number matches, but the revision number does not. 16299 in this case is the build number for Windows Server ver. 1709
Although, it is still best practice to have containers built with the latest image available.
Ah, understood. In the release of WS2016, our recommendation was to have matching host/container build and revision numbers. For example, consider a build with the value 10.0.14393.1944 (major/minor/build/revision). 14393 in this case is the build number for WS2016.
In 1709 we've relaxed this recommendation a little bit. Just so long as the host/container build numbers are the same (14393, 16299, etc), the revision numbers can differ. So in this case, for a host running 10.0.16299.125, it's ok to run a container with version 10.0.16299.19. Notice how the build number matches, but the revision number does not. 16299 in this case is the build number for Windows Server ver. 1709
Although, it is still best practice to have containers built with the latest image available.
- Ulf AxelssonDec 05, 2017Copper ContributorGreat, thank you!