Any reason why you are using boot2docker and virtualbox and not the native Docker for macOS ?
Right now Docker for Mac is still pretty new as is xhyve (what it uses instead of VirtualBox).
I know VirtualBox isn’t everyone’s favorite software, but it is very mature, very stable, and fast. I’ve looked at benchmarks of VirtualBox vs. xhyve and CPU performance is 2x better in VBox than it is in xhyve.
With that said, we’re totally open to xhyve but we want to wait for it to mature first.
ok … thanks for the quick answer. Local works like a charm, just moved from VVV.
I thought it might have to do with the planned windows version. Using virtualbox instead of native docker provides a uniform and cross platform solition with virtualbox as only os specific piece if software (apart from local)
I may be wrong, but at least it makes sense 
The benchmarks I found seem to show CPU speed to be about the same, but significantly slower disk access.
One advantage of not using VirtualBox would probably be RAM usage. I’d really love local to be as frugal (and fast) as, say, Laravel Valet –– while still remaining the far more professional solution, of course 
why do you care what hypervisor the docker system uses? just be a consumer! you shouldn’t be trying to ship your own implementation of docker, but should just use whatever is provided by the user/system. on linux, use docker. on mac, use docker. on windows, use docker. this is the promise of docker, yet you are breaking the guaranteed compatibility by trying to ship your own runtime!
Looks like Docker for Mac at least is slowly getting there: https://stories.amazee.io/docker-on-mac-performance-docker-machine-vs-docker-for-mac-4c64c0afdf99
1 Like
One advantage native Docker might possibly have: longer battery runtime.
The VBoxHeadless process is the one single process on my Mac that always comes up as “using significant energy”, regardless of whether it is doing anything at all or just sitting there idly, with no site in Local running.
1 Like