I am using ansible (2.0) docker module to start a jboss docker container. My playbook looks as follows:
- name: Pull aplication jboss container
docker:
name: jboss
image: jboss/wildfly
state: started
pull: always
ports:
- "9990:9990"
- "8080:8080"
command: "/opt/jboss/wildfly/bin/standalone.sh -b 0.0.0.0 -bmanagement 0.0.0.0"
I want to mimic the command shown in the docs:
docker run -p 8080:8080 -p 9990:9990 -it jboss/wildfly /opt/jboss/wildfly/bin/standalone.sh -b 0.0.0.0 -bmanagement 0.0.0.0
If I execute the playbook, and run docker ps, my ports are not bound to 9990, only 8080:
0.0.0.0:8080->8080/tcp
If I do not use the playbook, and only run my docker container using the aforementioned command that I want to mimic, I can see both ports:
0.0.0.0:8080->8080/tcp, 0.0.0.0:9990->9990/tcp
How would I use the docker module to bind both 8080 and 9990 ports?
I ended up manually exposing the both ports to make this work, via the expose command:
- name: Pull aplication jboss container
docker:
name: jboss
image: jboss/wildfly
state: started
pull: always
expose:
- 9990
- 8080
ports:
- "9990:9990"
- "8080:8080"
command: "/opt/jboss/wildfly/bin/standalone.sh -b 0.0.0.0 -bmanagement 0.0.0.0"
I am not sure if that is the best answer, but for now, it is solving the problem of the ports not being exposed.
Related
I'm trying to build a Jenkins docker container by following this page so I can test locally. Problem is with this is that once I've ran docker run -it -p 8080:8080 jenkins/jenkins:lts it seems I cannot use the same port for my docker-compose.yml:
version: '3.8'
services:
jenkins:
image: jenkins/jenkins:lts
container_name: jenkins
user: root
privileged: true
ports:
- 8080:8080
- 50000:50000
volumes:
- .jenkins/jenkins_configuration:/var/jenkins_home
- /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock
The error shown in PowerShell (I'm on windows 10 if that's relevant) is:
Error response from daemon: driver failed programming external connectivity on endpoint jenkins (xxxx): Bind for 0.0.0.0:8080 failed: port is already allocated
I've made sure it's not affected from another container, image or volume and have deleted everything apart from this.
I wish to use Jenkins locally but how can I get around this? I'm not familiar with networking and what I've googled so far has not seemed to work for me. I would like this to be able to use Jenkins ui on localhost:8080
If port 8080 is already allocated on your host machine, you can just map a different one to 8080 of the container instead. Two things can't be mapped to the same port on the host machine. In order to map 8081 for example, change your compose to the following:
version: '3.8'
services:
jenkins:
image: jenkins/jenkins:lts
container_name: jenkins
user: root
privileged: true
ports:
- 8081:8080 # a different port is mapped here
- 50000:50000
volumes:
- .jenkins/jenkins_configuration:/var/jenkins_home
- /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock
Then, you just need to access the container started by docker-compose with port localhost:8081 rather than localhost:8080.
This probably just related to WSL in general but Redis is my use case.
This works fine and I can connect like:
docker exec -it redis-1 redis-cli -c -p 7001 -a Password123
But I cannot make any connections from my local windows pc to the container. I get
Could not connect: Error 10061 connecting to host.docker.internal:7001. No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it.
This is the same error when the container isn't running, so not sure if it's a docker issue or WSL?
version: '3.9'
services:
redis-cluster:
image: redis:latest
container_name: redis-cluster
command: redis-cli -a Password123 -p 7001 --cluster create 127.0.0.1:7001 127.0.0.1:7002 127.0.0.1:7003 127.0.0.1:7004 127.0.0.1:7005 127.0.0.1:7006 --cluster-replicas 1 --cluster-yes
depends_on:
- redis-1
- redis-2
- redis-3
- redis-4
- redis-5
- redis-6
network_mode: host
redis-1:
image: "redis:latest"
container_name: redis-1
network_mode: host
entrypoint: >
redis-server
--port 7001
--appendonly yes
--cluster-enabled yes
--cluster-config-file nodes.conf
--cluster-node-timeout 5000
--masterauth Password123
--requirepass Password123
--bind 0.0.0.0
--protected-mode no
# Five more the same as the above
According to the provided docker-compose.yml file, container ports are not exposed, so they are unreachable from the outside (your windows/wls host). Check here for the official reference. More about docker and ports here
As an example for redis-1 service, you should add the following to the definition.
...
redis-1:
ports:
- 7001:7001
...
...
The docker exec ... is working because the port is reachable from inside the container.
How can I change the port dynamodb starts on through the Amazon Docker image?
According to this answer, the -port option can be used when executing the dynamodb java file.
However, when running the docker image with this command: docker run -p 8000:8000 amazon/dynamodb-local I do not have the option of specifying the port dynamodb listens to, just the port connected between my host and the container.
Would I have to make my own Dockerfile, specifying the OS and installing dynamodb and whatnot, so I can run the java command and specify my port?
You don't need to rebuild the image. Doing
docker inspect amazon/dynamodb-local
shows that the Entrypoint is set as
"Entrypoint": [
"java"
],
So running the below command gives an error:
$ docker run -p 8001:8001 amazon/dynamodb-local -port 8001
Unrecognized option: -port
Error: Could not create the Java Virtual Machine.
Error: A fatal exception has occurred. Program will exit.
because we are trying to pass -port argument to java but we need to pass it to DynamoDBLocal.jar.
Once we know that, we can add the jar to the docker run and the following works:
$ docker run -p 8001:8001 amazon/dynamodb-local -jar DynamoDBLocal.jar -port 8001
Initializing DynamoDB Local with the following configuration:
Port: 8001
InMemory: false
DbPath: null
SharedDb: false
shouldDelayTransientStatuses: false
CorsParams: *
I would raise it as a bug but https://hub.docker.com/r/amazon/dynamodb-local/ doesn't mention a public github repo to raise the issue.
For some reason docker-compose does not map ports to the host for dynamodb. The next configuration will not work for the dynamodb-local image:
ports:
- "9000:8000"
The workaround is to put the port directly to the command,
-port 9000 is the same as ports: - "9000:9000" in docker-compose.
version: "3.8"
services:
service-dynamodb:
image: amazon/dynamodb-local
image: "amazon/dynamodb-local:latest"
working_dir: /home/dynamodblocal
# -port {number} is the same as
# ports: - {number}:{number} in Docker
command: "-jar DynamoDBLocal.jar -port 9000 -sharedDb -optimizeDbBeforeStartup -dbPath ./data"
volumes:
- ./data:/home/dynamodblocal/data
I tried the official image to override entry point but there was some unknown error, But you can good to go with this approach.
Just create a New Docker image from amazon/dynamodb-local as a base image.
Build.
docker build -t mydb .
and run it
docker run -it --rm -p 8001:8001 mydb
Below is the Dockerfile
FROM amazon/dynamodb-local
WORKDIR /home/dynamodblocal
ENTRYPOINT ["java", "-jar", "DynamoDBLocal.jar", "-port", "8003"]
As you will see the port.
[https://github.com/gtriggiano/ngrok-tunnel ] runs ngrok inside a container. Ngrok is required to run in the container to avert security risks. But am facing problems after running the scripts, which generates the url
$ docker pull gtriggiano/ngrok-tunnel
$ docker run -it -e "TARGET_HOST=localhost" -e "TARGET_PORT=3000" -p 4040 gtriggiano/ngrok-tunnel
am running my rails app on localhost:3000
is it my problem or can it be fixed by altering the scripts(inside the repo)?
I couldn't get this working but switched to https://github.com/shkoliar/docker-ngrok and it works brilliantly.
In my case I added it to my docker-compose.yml file:
ngrok:
image: shkoliar/ngrok:latest
ports:
- 4551:4551
links:
- web
environment:
- PARAMS=http -region=eu -authtoken=${NGROK_AUTH_TOKEN} localdev.docker:80
networks:
dev_net:
ipv4_address: 10.5.0.10
And it's started with everything else when I do docker-compose up -d
Then there's a web UI at http://localhost:4551/ for you to see the status, requests, the ngrok URLs, etc.
The Github page does have examples of running it manually from the command line too though, rather than via docker-compose:
Command-line Example The example below assumes that you have running
web server docker container named dev_web_1 with exposed port 80.
docker run --rm -it --link dev_web_1 shkoliar/ngrok ngrok http dev_web_1:80
With command line usage, ngrok session is active until it
won't be terminated by Ctrl+C combination.
No. if you execute -p with single number it's container port - host port is randomly assigned.
Using -p, --publish ip:[hostPort]:containerPort at docker run can specify the the host port with the container port.
as of now the 4040 of container is exposed. Not sure if your service listens by default on it.
To get localhost port execute
docker ps
you'll see the actual port it's not listening on.
CONTAINER ID IMAGE COMMAND CREATED STATUS PORTS NAMES
1aaaeffe789d gtriggiano/ngrok-tunnel "npm start" About a minute ago Up About a minute 0.0.0.0:32768->4040/tcp wizardly_poincare
here it's listening on localhost:32768
this composer works for me. Note that in the entrypoint command for ngrok you have to reference the other service by name
version: '3'
services:
yourwebserver:
build:
context: ./
dockerfile: ...
target: ...
container_name: yourwebserver
volumes:
- ...
ports:
- ...
extra_hosts:
- 'host.docker.internal:host-gateway'
depends_on:
- ngrok
ngrok:
image: ngrok/ngrok:alpine
environment:
NGROK_AUTHTOKEN: '...'
command: 'http yourwebserver:80'
ports:
- '4040:4040'
expose:
- '4040'
I'm not sure if you have already solved this but when I was getting this error I could only solve it like this:
# docker-compose.yml
networks:
- development
I also needed to expose the 3000 port of my web container because it still wasn't exposed.
# docker.compose.yml
web:
expose:
- "3000"
My container for the server running on development is also under the development network. The only parameters, I believe, you should pass for the container to execute are image, ports, environment with DOMAIN and PORT for the server container, a link, and an expose on your web container:
# docker-compose.yml
ngrok:
image: shkoliar/ngrok
ports:
- 4551:4551
links:
- web
networks:
- development
environment:
- DOMAIN=squad_web
- PORT=3000
Actually to make ngrok work with your docker container you can install it outside of your project just like the manual on their website says. And then add
nginx:
labels:
- "traefik.http.routers.${PROJECT_NAME}_nginx.rule=Host(`${PROJECT_BASE_URL}`, `aaa-abc-xxx-140-177.eu.ngrok.io`)"
This particular example is for docker4drupal docker-compose file and traefik mapped as 80:80
I have downloaded the Docker Consul image and it is running, but I am not able to access its web UI. Does any one have an idea how to get started. I am running this on my local machine in developer mode.
I am running:
docker run -d --name=dev-consul -e CONSUL_BIND_INTERFACE=eth0 consul
See documentation:
The Web UI can be enabled by adding the -ui-dir flag:
$ docker run -p 8400:8400 -p 8500:8500 -p 8600:53/udp -h node1 progrium/consul -server -bootstrap -ui-dir /ui
We publish 8400 (RPC), 8500 (HTTP), and 8600 (DNS) so you can try all three interfaces. We also give it a hostname of node1. Setting the container hostname is the intended way to name the Consul Agent node.
You can try to activate ui by setting the -ui-dir flag.
First set experimental to true in docker desktop if you're using windows containers.
The command below will work, because you need to expose the port 8500.
docker run -d -e CONSUL_BIND_INTERFACE=eth0 -p 8500:8500 consul
You will be able to access consul at http://localhost:8500/
You could also use a compose file like this:
version: "3.7"
services:
consul:
image: consul
ports:
- "8500:8500"
environment:
- CONSUL_BIND_INTERFACE=eth0
networks:
nat:
aliases:
- consul