HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
portworx
lcfs
C2017–2017
portworx / lcfs

lcfs

LCFS Graph driver for Docker

2Distinct people
2Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
296GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

LCFS Graph driver for Docker

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by day2 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2017-01-31 17:01:20 UTC to 2017-02-21 09:26:40 UTC.

012017-01-31 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 commentsJan 312017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-02 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-02 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-03 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-03 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-04 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-04 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-05 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-05 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-06 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-06 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-07 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-07 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-08 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-08 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-09 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-09 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-10 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-10 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-11 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsFeb 102017-02-11 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-12 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-12 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-13 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-13 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-14 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-14 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-15 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-15 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-16 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-16 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-17 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-17 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-18 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-18 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-19 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-19 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-20 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-20 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-21 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-02-21 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-22 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsFeb 21

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Jan 312017-01-31 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC110
Feb 12017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-02 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 22017-02-02 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-03 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 32017-02-03 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-04 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 42017-02-04 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-05 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 52017-02-05 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-06 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 62017-02-06 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-07 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 72017-02-07 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-08 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 82017-02-08 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-09 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 92017-02-09 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-10 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 102017-02-10 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-11 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 112017-02-11 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-12 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 122017-02-12 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-13 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 132017-02-13 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-14 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 142017-02-14 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-15 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 152017-02-15 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-16 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 162017-02-16 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-17 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 172017-02-17 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-18 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 182017-02-18 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-19 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 192017-02-19 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-20 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 202017-02-20 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-21 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 212017-02-21 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-22 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

2 sources
Container native storage has two aspects. One, the storage that container uses, (Like Docker uses Device Mapper, Overlay2 etc.) and two, the persistent storage that the applications inside containers need. Both of them need to be truly container native. Portworx is attempting LCFS to provide a container native storage for containers itself https://github.com/portworx/lcfs. So, you are right. You would need a container-native storage (file system for Docker) for running containers. OpenEBS is targeting providing containerized storage (persistent+block storage) for applications in containers. OpenEBS builds a storage volume as a container and presents the volume-container as part of the K8s POD. This way the the storage persistence problems are resolved by K8S orchestration ingelligence written for application PODs. Ofcouse, OpenEBS conta
Read the rest
iners will use LCFS when it is ready.
In Torus development has been stopped at CoreOS

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.