OS: Windows server 2016
I have an App wrote in Go and put in a docker container. The App has to access "D:\test.db". How can I do that?
Using docker volumes and by using the -v or --mount flag when you start your container.
A modified example from the Docker docs:
$ docker run -d \
--mount source=myvol2,target=/app \
nginx:latest
you just need to replace nginx:latext with your image name and adapt source and target as you need.
Another example (also from the docs) using -v and mounting in read-only mode:
$ docker run -d \
-v nginx-vol:/usr/share/nginx/html:ro \
nginx:latest
Related
I am using docker datapower image for local development. I am using this image
https://hub.docker.com/layers/ibmcom/datapower/latest/images/sha256-35b1a3fcb57d7e036d60480a25e2709e517901f69fab5407d70ccd4b985c2725?context=explore
Datapower version: IDG.10.0.1.0
System: Docker for mac
Docker version 19.03.13
I am running the container with the following config
docker run -it \
-v $PWD/config:/drouter/config \
-v $PWD/local:/drouter/local \
-e DATAPOWER_ACCEPT_LICENSE=true \
-e DATAPOWER_INTERACTIVE=true \
-p 9090:9090 \
-p 9022:22 \
-p 5554:5554 \
-p 8000-8010:8000-8010 \
ibmcom/datapower
when I create files in file management or save a DP object configuration I do not see the changes reflected in the directory on my machine
also I would expect to be able to create files on my host directory and see them reflected in /drouter/config + /drouter/local in the container as well as in the management GUI
the volume mounts don't seem to be working correctly or perhaps I misunderstand something about Datapower or Docker
I have tried mounting volumes in other docker containers under the same path and that works fine so I don't think its an issue with file sharing settings in docker.
The file system structure changed in version 10.0. There is some documentation in the IBM Knowledge Center showing the updated locations for config:, local:, etc., but the Dockerhub page is not updated to reflect that yet.
mounting the volumes like this fixed it for me
-v $PWD/config:/opt/ibm/datapower/drouter/config \
-v $PWD/local:/opt/ibm/datapower/drouter/local \
It seems the container is persisting configuration here instead. This is different than the instructions on dockerHub
I recently found out about Podman (https://podman.io). Having a way to use Linux fork processes instead of a Daemon and not having to run using root just got my attention.
But I'm very used to orchestrate the containers running on my machine (in production we use kubernetes) using docker-compose. And I truly like it.
So I'm trying to replace docker-compose. I will try to keep docker-compose and using podman as an alias to docker as Podman uses the same syntax as docker:
alias docker=podman
Will it work? Can you suggest any other tool? I really intend to keep my docker-compose.yml file, if possible.
Yes, that is doable now, check podman-compose, this is one way of doing it, another way is to convert the docker-compose yaml file to a kubernetes deployment using Kompose. there is a blog post from Jérôme Petazzoni #jpetazzo: from docker-compose to kubernetes deployment
Update 6 May 2022 : Podman now supports Docker Compose v2.2 and higher (see Podman 4.1.0 release notes)
Old answer:
Running docker-compose with Podman as a normal user (rootless)
Requirement: Podman version >= 3.2.1 (released in June 2021)
Install the executable docker-compose
curl -sL -o ~/docker-compose https://github.com/docker/compose/releases/latest/download/docker-compose-$(uname -s)-$(uname -m)
chmod 755 ~/docker-compose
Alternatively you could also run docker-compose in a container image (see below).
Run
systemctl --user start podman.socket
Set the environment variable DOCKER_HOST
export DOCKER_HOST=unix://$XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock
Run
~/docker-compose up -d
Running docker-compose with Podman as root
Requirement: Podman version >= 3.0 (released in February 2021)
Follow the same procedure but remove the flag --user
systemctl start podman.socket
Running docker-compose in a container image
Use the container image docker.io/docker/compose to run
docker-compose
podman \
run \
--rm \
--detach \
--env DOCKER_HOST=unix://$XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock \
--security-opt label=disable \
--volume $XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock:$XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock \
--volume $(pwd):$(pwd) \
--workdir $(pwd) \
docker.io/docker/compose \
--verbose \
up -d
(the flag --verbose is optional)
The same command with short command-line options on a single line:
podman run --rm -d -e DOCKER_HOST=unix://$XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock --security-opt label=disable -v $XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock:$XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock -v $(pwd):$(pwd) -w $(pwd) docker.io/docker/compose --verbose up -d
Regarding SELINUX: Runnng Podman with SELINUX is preferable from a security point-of-view, but I didn't get it to work on a Fedora 34 computer so I disabled SELINUX by adding the command-line option
--security-opt label=disable
Troubleshooting tips
Test the Docker REST API
A minimal check to see that the Docker REST API is working:
$ curl -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
--unix-socket $XDG_RUNTIME_DIR/podman/podman.sock \
http://localhost/_ping
OK$
Avoid short container image names
If any of your docker-compose.yaml or Dockerfile files contain a short container image name, for instance
$ grep image: docker-compose.yaml
image: mysql:8.0.19
$
$ grep FROM Dockerfile
FROM python:3.9
$
edit the files to use the whole container image name instead
$ grep image: docker-compose.yaml
image: docker.io/library/mysql:8.0.19
$
$ grep FROM Dockerfile
FROM docker.io/library/python:3.9
$
Most often short names have been used to reference DockerHub Official Images
(a catalogue) so a good guess would be to prepend the container image name with docker.io/library/
There are currently many different container image registries, not just DockerHub (docker.io). Writing the whole container image name is thus a good practice. Podman might complain otherwise depending on how Podman is configured.
Rootless users can't bind to ports below 1024
If for instance
$ grep -A1 ports: docker-compose.yml
ports:
- 80:80
$
edit docker-compose.yaml so that the host port number >= 1024, for instance 8080
$ grep -A1 ports: docker-compose.yml
ports:
- 8080:80
$
An alternative solution is to adjust net.ipv4.ip_unprivileged_port_start with sysctl (see Shortcomings of Rootless Podman)
In case Systemd is missing
Most Linux distributions use Systemd where you would preferably start the Podman service (providing the REST API) by "starting" the Podman socket
systemctl --user start podman.socket
or
systemctl start podman.socket
but in case Systemd is missing you could also start the Podman service directly
podman system service --time 0 unix:/some/path/podman.sock
Systemd gives the extra benefit that the Podman service is started on demand with Systemd socket activation and stops after some time of inactivity.
Caveat: Swarm functionality is missing
A difference to Docker is that the functionality relating to Swarm is not supported when using docker-compose with Podman.
References:
https://www.redhat.com/sysadmin/podman-docker-compose
https://github.com/containers/podman/discussions/10644#discussioncomment-857897
Ensure Podman is installed on your machine.
You can install Podman Compose in a terminal with the following command:
pip3 install https://github.com/containers/podman-compose/archive/devel.tar.gz
cd into the directory your docker-compose file is located in
Run podman-compose up
See the following link for a decent introduction.
I'm following this guide to install docker for my GitLab server running on Ubuntu 16.4.
When I execute the following command:
docker run -d --name gitlab-runner --restart always \
-v /srv/gitlab-runner/config:/etc/gitlab-runner \
-v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock \
gitlab/gitlab-runner:latest
So far so good. However, when I run the next command to register the runner from this guide:
docker run --rm -t -i -v /srv/gitlab-runner/config:/etc/gitlab-runner --name gitlab-runner gitlab/gitlab-runner register
I keep getting the message:
docker: Error response from daemon: Conflict. The container name "/gitlab-runner" is already in use by container "b055ded012f9d0ed085fe84756604464afbb11871b432a21300064333e34cb1d". You have to remove (or rename) that container to be able to reuse that name.
However, when I run docker container list to see the list of containers, it's empty.
Anyone know how I can fix this error?
Just to add my 2-cents as I've also recently been through those GitLab documents to get the Docker GitLab runner working.
Following the Docker image installation and configuration guide, it tells you to start that container, however that I believe, is a mistake, and you want to do that after registering the Runner.
If you did run:
docker run -d --name gitlab-runner --restart always \
-v /srv/gitlab-runner/config:/etc/gitlab-runner \
-v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock \
gitlab/gitlab-runner:latest
Just remove the docker container with docker rm -f gitlab-runner, and move on to registering the runner.
docker run --rm -t -i -v /srv/gitlab-runner/config:/etc/gitlab-runner --name gitlab-runner gitlab/gitlab-runner register
This would register the runner, and also place the configuration in /srv/gitlab-runner/config/config.toml on the local machine.
You can then run the original docker run:
docker run -d --name gitlab-runner --restart always \
-v /srv/gitlab-runner/config:/etc/gitlab-runner \
-v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock \
gitlab/gitlab-runner:latest
(NB, if this doesn't work because of the name being in use again - just run the docker rm -f gitlab-runner command again - you won't lose the gitlab-runner configuration).
And that would stand up the Docker gitlab-runner with the configuration set from the register command.
Hope this helps!
You're trying to run two containers with the same name? Where did these instructions come from? Then in your response you're saying you get the error 'No such container: gitlab-runner-config' but that's not the name of any of the containers you're trying to run?
Seems that your first container is meant to be called gitlab-runner-config based on everything else I see in there, including your volumes-from. Probably that's why gitlab-runner doesn't show up in docker ps, because you're trying to get volumes from a container that doesn't exist. Try clearing everything, and then run the following:
$ docker run -d --name gitlab-runner-config --restart always \
-v /srv/gitlab-runner/config:/etc/gitlab-runner \
-v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock \
gitlab/gitlab-runner:latest
...
$ docker run -d --name gitlab-runner --restart always \
-v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock \
--volumes-from gitlab-runner-config \
gitlab/gitlab-runner:latest
EDIT: OK so I read the guide, you're following the instructions wrong. It's saying in step 2, either do the one command, or the two afterwards. Either do a combined config and run container (which is called gitlab-runner) or do a config container (called gitlab-runner-config) then a runner container (called gitlab-runner). You're doing multiple steps with the same container name but mixing them up.
Run docker ps -a and you will see all your containers (even the not running ones), if you use the --rm option on run your container will be removed when stopped if that is the behaviour you are after.
You could always just skip the whole --name option if you want to create more than one of the same image and don't care about the name.
I also came across this, and opened an issue against the GitLab documentation. Here's my comment in there:
Actually, I think the issue might be something different:
On step 3, clicking on the link takes you to https://docs.gitlab.com/runner/register/index.html#docker.
In doing this, you land on the right section, near the end of the page. But this also means that you miss one important bit of information at the top of the page:
Before registering a Runner, you need to first:
Install it on a server separate than where GitLab is installed on
Obtain a token for a shared or specific Runner via GitLab's interface
That is, the documentation instructions recommend and assume that the gitlab runner container is on another machine. Thus they are not expected to work for containers on the same one.
My suggestion would be to add a note after the register step to check the registration requirements at the top of the page first.
Other than that, #johnharris85's answer would work for registering the runner on the same machine. The only extra thing you'd need to do is to add the --network="host" option to the command to do the registration. That is:
sudo docker run --rm -t -i \
-v /srv/gitlab-runner/config:/etc/gitlab-runner \
--network="host" --name gitlab-runner-register \
gitlab/gitlab-runner register
I would like to run this command:
docker run docker-mup deploy --config .deploy/mup.js
where docker-mup is the name the image, and deploy, --config, .deploy/mup.js are arguments
My question: how to mount a volume such that .deploy/mup.js is understood as the relative path on the host from where the docker run command is run?
I tried different things with VOLUME but it seems that VOLUME does the contrary: it exposes a container directory to the host.
I can't use -v because this container will be used as a build step in a CI/CD pipeline and as I understand it, it is just run as is.
I can't use -v because this container will be used as a build step in a CI/CD pipeline and as I understand it, it is just run as is.
Using -v to expose your current directory is the only way to make that .deploy/mup.js file inside your container, unless you are baking it into the image itself using a COPY directive in your Dockerfile.
Using the -v option to map a host directory might look something like this:
docker run \
-v $PWD/.deploy:/data/.deploy \
-w /data \
docker-mup deploy --config .deploy/mup.js
This would map (using -v ...) the $PWD/.deploy directory onto /data/.deploy in your container, set the current working directory to /data (using -w ...), and then run deploy --config .deploy/mup.js.
Windows - Powershell
If you're inside the directory you want to bind mount, use ${pwd}:
docker run -it --rm -d -p 8080:80 --name web -v ${pwd}:/usr/share/nginx/html nginx
or $pwd/. (forward slash dot):
docker run -it --rm -d -p 8080:80 --name web -v $pwd/.:/usr/share/nginx/html nginx
Just $pwd will cause an error:
docker run -it --rm -d -p 8080:80 --name web -v $pwd:/usr/share/nginx/html nginx
Variable reference is not valid. ':' was not followed by a valid variable name character. Consider using ${} to
delimit the name
Mounting a subdirectory underneath your current location, e.g. "site-content", $pwd/ + subdir is fine:
docker run -it --rm -d -p 8080:80 --name web -v $pwd/site-content:/usr/share/nginx/html nginx
In my case there was no need for $pwd, and using the standard current folder notation . was enough. For reference, I used docker-compose.yml and ran docker-compose up.
Here is a relevant part of docker-compose.yml.
volumes:
- '.\logs\:/data'
I know docker, but less about bitcoind.
Now I want to use this docker image to start my own test environment:
The description tells me:
docker volume create --name=bitcoind-data
docker run -v bitcoind-data:/bitcoin --name=bitcoind-node -d \
-p 8333:8333 \
-p 127.0.0.1:8332:8332 \
kylemanna/bitcoind
Now I want to now how I have to add my bitcoind.conf?
This isn't provided anywere? Can I use it at container startup or docker exec?
The repository contains a documentation file dedicated to your issue: https://github.com/kylemanna/docker-bitcoind/blob/master/docs/config.md