Supposed I have a Docker container and a folder on my host /hostFolder. Now if I want to add this folder to the Docker container as a volume, then I can do this either by using ADD in the Dockerfile or mounting it as a volume.
So far, so good.
Now /hostFolder contains a sub-folder, /hostFolder/subFolder.
I want to mount /hostFolder into the Docker container (whether as read-write or read-only does not matter, works both for me), but I do NOT want to have it included /hostFolder/subFolder. I want to exclude this, and I also want the Docker container be able to make changes to this sub-folder, without the consequence of having it changed on the host as well.
Is this possible? If so, how?
Using docker-compose I'm able to use node_modules locally, but ignore it in the docker container using the following syntax in the docker-compose.yml
volumes:
- './angularApp:/opt/app'
- /opt/app/node_modules/
So everything in ./angularApp is mapped to /opt/app and then I create another mount volume /opt/app/node_modules/ which is now empty directory - even if in my local machine ./angularApp/node_modules is not empty.
If you want to have subdirectories ignored by docker-compose but persistent, you can do the following in docker-compose.yml:
volumes:
node_modules:
services:
server:
volumes:
- .:/app
- node_modules:/app/node_modules
This will mount your current directory as a shared volume, but mount a persistent docker volume in place of your local node_modules directory. This is similar to the answer by #kernix, but this will allow node_modules to persist between docker-compose up runs, which is likely the desired behavior.
For those trying to get a nice workflow going where node_modules isn't overridden by local this might help.
Change your docker-compose to mount an anonymous persistent volume to node_modules to prevent your local overriding it. This has been outlined in this thread a few times.
services:
server:
build: .
volumes:
- .:/app
- /app/node_modules
This is the important bit we were missing. When spinning up your stack use docker-compose -V. Without this if you added a new package and rebuilt your image it would be using the node_modules from your initial docker-compose launch.
-V, --renew-anon-volumes Recreate anonymous volumes instead of retrieving
data from the previous containers.
To exclude a file, use the following
volumes:
- /hostFolder:/folder
- /dev/null:/folder/fileToBeExcluded
With the docker command line:
docker run \
--mount type=bind,src=/hostFolder,dst=/containerFolder \
--mount type=volume,dst=/containerFolder/subFolder \
...other-args...
The -v option may also be used (credit to Bogdan Mart), but --mount is clearer and recommended.
First, using the ADD instruction in a Dockerfile is very different from using a volume (either via the -v argument to docker run or the VOLUME instruction in a Dockerfile). The ADD and COPY commands just take a copy of the files at the time docker build is run. These files are not updated until a fresh image is created with the docker build command. By contrast, using a volume is essentially saying "this directory should not be stored in the container image; instead use a directory on the host"; whenever a file inside a volume is changed, both the host and container will see it immediately.
I don't believe you can achieve what you want using volumes, you'll have to rethink your directory structure if you want to do this.
However, it's quite simple to achieve using COPY (which should be preferred to ADD). You can either use a .dockerignore file to exclude the subdirectory, or you could COPY all the files then do a RUN rm bla to remove the subdirectory.
Remember that any files you add to image with COPY or ADD must be inside the build context i.e. in or below the directory you run docker build from.
for the people who also had the issue that the node_modules folder would still overwrite from your local system and the other way around
volumes:
node_modules:
services:
server:
volumes:
- .:/app
- node_modules:/app/node_modules/
This is the solution, With the trailing / after the node_modules being the fix.
Looks like the old solution doesn't work anymore(at least for me).
Creating an empty folder and mapping target folder to it helped though.
volumes:
- ./angularApp:/opt/app
- .empty:/opt/app/node_modules/
I found this link which saved me: Working with docker bind mounts and node_modules.
This working solution will create a "exclude" named volume in docker volumes manager. The volume name "exclude" is arbitrary, so you can use a custom name for the volume intead exclude.
services:
node:
command: nodemon index.js
volumes:
- ./:/usr/local/app/
# the volume above prevents our host system's node_modules to be mounted
- exclude:/usr/local/app/node_modules/
volumes:
exclude:
You can see more infos about volumes in Official docs - Use a volume with docker compose
To exclude a mounted file contained in the volume of your machine, you will have to overwrite it by allocating a volume to this same file.
In your config file:
services:
server:
build : ./Dockerfile
volumes:
- .:/app
An example in you dockerfile:
# Image Location
FROM node:13.12.0-buster
VOLUME /app/you_overwrite_file
Related
I have the following docker-compose:
version: '3.7'
services:
db:
image: bitnami/mongodb:5.0.6
volumes:
- "/app/local-data:/data/db"
env_file: ./db/.env
The problem is data does not persist between docker-compose up/down and docker does not seem to use /app/local-data even though it creates it.
When I run docker-compose, container starts and works naturally. The directory /app/local-data is created by docker, however Mongodb does not populate it, and no r/w error is being shown on console. This makes me thing a temporary volume is assigned to container instead.. But if that is true then why docker still creates /app/local-data and not using it?
Any ideas how can I debug this?
Docker directives like volumes: don't know anything about what's actually running in the image. That directive creates the specified host and container paths if required, and bind-mounts the host path into the container path. It's up to the application code to use that directory (or not).
If you look at the bitnami/mongodb Docker Hub page under "Persisting your database", the database is configured to store data in the /bitnami/mongodb directory inside the container, and that directory needs to be the second volumes: path. Also note the requirement that the data directory needs to be writable by user ID 1001, which may or may not exist on your host (there's no specific requirement to create it).
volumes:
- "/app/local-data:/bitnami/mongodb"
# ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
sudo chown -R 1001 /app/local-data
sudo docker-compose up -d
I am very (read very) new to Docker so experimenting. I have created a very basic Dockerfile to pull in Laravel:
FROM composer:latest
RUN composer_version="$(composer --version)" && echo $composer_version
RUN composer global require laravel/installer
WORKDIR /var/www
RUN composer create-project --prefer-dist laravel/laravel site
My docker-compose.yml file looks like:
version: '3.7'
services:
laravel:
build:
context: .
dockerfile: laravel.dockerfile
container_name: my_laravel
network_mode: host
restart: on-failure
volumes:
- ./site:/var/www/site
When I run docker-compose up, the ./site directory is created but the contents are empty. I've put this in docker-compose as I plan on on including other things like nginx, mysql, php etc
The command:
docker run -v "/where/i/want/data/site:/var/www/site" my_laravel
Results in the same behaviour.
I know the install is successful as I modified my dockerfile with the follwing two lines appended to it:
WORKDIR /var/www/site
RUN ls -la
Which gives me the correct listing.
Clearly misunderstanding something here. Any help appreciated.
EDIT: So, I was able to get this to work... although, it slightly more difficult than just specifying a path..
You can accomplish this by specifying a volume in docker-compose.yml.. The path to the directory (on the host) is labeled as device in the compose file.. It appears that the root of the path has to be an actual volume (possibly a share would work) but the 'destination' of the path can be a directory on the specified volume..
I created a new volume called docker on my machine but I suppose you could do this with your existing disk/volume..
I am on a Mac and this docker-compose.yml file worked for me:
version: '3.7'
services:
nodemon-test:
container_name: my-nodemon-test
image: oze4/nodemon-docker-test
ports:
- "1337:1337"
volumes:
- docker_test_app:/app # see comment below on which name to use here
volumes:
docker_test_app: # use this name under `volumes:` for the service
name: docker_test_app
driver: local
driver_opts:
o: bind
type: none
device: /Volumes/docker/docker_test_app
The container specified exists in my DockerHub.. this is the source code for it, just in case you are worried about anything malicious. I created it like two weeks ago to help someone else on StackOverflow.
Shows files from the container on my machine (the host)..
You can read more about Docker Volume configs here if you would like.
ORIGINAL ANSWER:
It looks like you are trying to share the build directory with your host machine.. After some testing, it appears Docker will overwrite the specified path on the container with the contents of the path on the host.
If you run docker logs my_laravel you should see an error about missing files at /var/www/site.. So, even though the build is successful - once Docker mounts the directory from your machine (./site) onto the container (/var/www/site) it overwrites the path within the container (/var/www/site) with the contents of the path on your host (./site) - which is empty.
To test and make sure the contents of /var/www/site are in fact being overwritten, you can run docker exec -it /bin/bash (you may need to replace /bin/bash with /bash).. This will give you command line access inside of the container. From there you can do ls -a /var/www/site..
Furthermore, you can also pre-stage ./site to have a random test file in it (test.txt or whatever), then docker-compose up -d, then run the same commands from the step above docker exec -it ... and see if the staged test.txt file is now inside the container - this gives you definitive evidence that when you run volumes, the data on your host overwrites data in the container.
With that being said, doing something like this and sharing a log directory will work... the volume path specified on the container is still overwritten, the difference is the container is writing to that path.. it doesn't rely on it for config files/app files.
Hope this helps.
I am not sure if this is a right question to ask. In the tutorial of Docker compose, https://docs.docker.com/compose/gettingstarted/#step-5-edit-the-compose-file-to-add-a-bind-mount, there is a volume key in the docker-compose.yml:
version: '3'
services:
web:
build: .
ports:
- "5000:5000"
volumes:
- .:/code
redis:
image: "redis:alpine"
And according to the tutorial, the volume key mounts the local file to the remote, and therefore we can change the code on the fly without restarting the Docker. My question is what internet protocol is used behind to transfer the updated code file.
Furthermore, I guess there would be more framework having this feature. What are the common protocols behind and why?
The tutorial doesn't say "the volume key mounts the local file to the remote". It says:
...in your project directory to add a bind mount for the web service:
[...]
The new volumes key mounts the project directory (current directory) on the host to /code inside the container, allowing you to modify the code on the fly, without having to rebuild the image.
If you click on the bind mount link, it will take you to
documentation that should answer all of your questions.
Briefly, a bind mount is way of making one directory on your system
appear in another location. For example, if I were run:
mkdir /tmp/newetc
mount -o bind /etc /tmp/newetc
Then running ls /tmp/newetc would show the same contents as /etc.
Docker uses this feature to expose host directories inside your
containers.
A bind mount only works on the same host; it cannot be used to expose
files on your local system to a remote system. It is a kernel feature and there are no internet protocols involved.
A few lines from docker-compose.yml
volumes:
- ./yii-application:/app/yii-application
- /app/yii-application/common/config/
First line adds to the volume an entire application.
The second one makes some sort of exclude of config folder, so I do not need my config from host machine.
A few lines from Dockerfile
COPY ./config-${APP_ENV}/common /app/yii-application/common/config
Instead of COPY I tried
RUN cp -a /app/config-${APP_ENV}/common/. /app/yii-application/common/config
It does not work either.
I think there is an issue in the order of the commands that are being executed:
When you are building and image with Dockerfile, you are coping the code inside dir /app/yii-application/common/config.
Then, you are mounting a volume: volumes: /app/yii-application/common/config/
and overwriting the existing dir with an empty dir that serves as a volume.
You need to work around that issue.
I moved the config files out of volume directory.
So, now the volume looks like this
volumes:
- ./yii-application:/app/yii-application
Config files in
./
I am trying to wrap my mind around Docker volumes but I must have some things missing to understand it.
Let's say I have a Python app that require some initialisation depending on env variables. What I'm trying to achieve is having a "Code only image" from which I can start containers that would be mounted at executions. The entrypoint script of the Main container will then read and generate some files from/on the Code only container.
I tried to create an image to have a copy of the code
FROM ubuntu
COPY ./app /usr/local/code/app
Then docker create --name code_volume
And with docker-compose:
app:
image: python/app
hostname: app
ports:
- "2443:443"
environment:
- ENV=stuff
volumes_from:
- code_volume
I get an error from the app container saying it can't find a file in /usr/local/code/app/src but when I run code_volume with bash then ls into the folder, the file is sitting there...
I tried to change access rights, add /bin/true (seeing it in some examples) but I just can't get what I want to be working. I checked the docker volume create feature but it seems to be for storing/sharing data afterward
What am I missing ? Is the entrypoint script executed before volumes are mounted ? Is there any best practices for cases like this that don't involve mounting folders and keeping one copy for every container ? Should I be thinking my containers over again ?
You do not declare the volume on code_volume container upon creation.
docker create -v /usr/local/code/app --name code_volume