🐛 Bug: Discrepancy between docker image sizes on ARM machines

[DhanshreeA]

Describe the bug.

Model images on ARM machines report a different size than what is shown on an Intel/AMD machine, even images built for the AMD platform. For example, the ersiliaos/eos3b5e:lates image reports the following sizes:

1. On an x86_64 machine, the model image's size is 979 MB.
2. On arm64 (Apple silicon, M3), the model image's size 1.53 GB
3. On the same machine with a shell run under Rosetta 2 and i386 architecture, the image specifically for platform=linux/amd64 is 1.43 GB. The arch was double checked through docker inspect.

Describe the steps to reproduce the behavior

Obtain a linux machine such as by setting up ersilia codespaces, and pull the said model, and inspect the size. Now, obtain a Apple silicon machine and pull the same image first normally, and then with the platform flag as docker pull --platform=linux/amd64 ersiliaos/eos3b5e, and inspect the image size.

Expected behavior.

The images should be comparable in size, or at least we should figure out if we can add any more arm specific optimizations during our builds.

Screenshots.

No response

Operating environment

Mac Sonoma

Additional context

No response

[miquelduranfrigola]

This is interesting.
Would it help to build those ARM images on GitHub Actions runners that are already ARM (e.g. M1)? GitHub now provides them.

[DhanshreeA]

Additional info here (See Additional Info in the linked issue): docker/cli#4980

[DhanshreeA]

This is interesting. Would it help to build those ARM images on GitHub Actions runners that are already ARM (e.g. M1)? GitHub now provides them.

I agree, definitely worth investigating at the very least.