I've recently learned that there is a disk limit of docker containers, on my system it is 50GB. I wonder if there is a way to bump up the disk limit for the same container, without creating a new one.
I created the container as this:
nvidia-docker run -dit -v host_dir:docker_local_dir -p 5000:8080 --name Test_Container --privileged Test_Image /bin/bash
after detaching from the container (probably a bad idea!), I wasn't able to attach it anymore:
$nvidia-docker exec -it Test_Container /bin/bash
Error response from daemon: Container ada1..230032 is not running
I really don't want to create a new container and redo lots of logistics.
Any ideas?
Thanks!
It seems that you can't expand the size further. Quoting the documentation:
$ sudo dockerd --storage-opt dm.basesize=50G
This will increase the base device size to 50G. The Docker daemon will
throw an error if existing base device size is larger than 50G. A user
can use this option to expand the base device size however shrinking
is not permitted.
To overcome this, what you should do is to map the particular folder of the container, that you know that will go high in size, to a location in the host OS (as you seem to be doing in the command). You can do it like this:
docker run -v /host/path/tmp:container/path/tmp
With which you are saying that everything that should be saved in container/path/tmp should be instead saved in /host/path/tmp. In this way you don't have any limits, other than the physical ones of the machine. With this approach you must recreate the container.
Not a solution by Docker per se, seems that's not feasible yet.
But to avoid recreating a new container, i found that as long as the 'host_dir' is not local (e.g., gpfs dir etc), you have a good chance to mount it within Docker:
mount -v -t cifs [network folder address/path] [mount folder] -o user=[user id/name],sec=ntlm
mount options should adjust accordingly.
Related
(Post created on Oct 05 '16)
I noticed that every time I run an image and delete it, my system doesn't return to the original amount of available space.
The lifecycle I'm applying to my containers is:
> docker build ...
> docker run CONTAINER_TAG
> docker stop CONTAINER_TAG
> rm docker CONTAINER_ID
> rmi docker image_id
[ running on a default mac terminal ]
The containers in fact were created from custom images, running from node and a standard redis. My OS is OSX 10.11.6.
At the end of the day I see I keep losing Mbs. How can I face this problem?
EDITED POST
2020 and the problem persists, leaving this update for the community:
Today running:
macOS 10.13.6
Docker Engine 18.9.2
Docker Desktop Cli 2.0.0.3
The easiest way to workaround the problem is to prune the system with the Docker utilties.
docker system prune -a --volumes
WARNING:
By default, volumes are not removed to prevent important data from being deleted if there is currently no container using the volume. Use the --volumes flag when running the command to prune volumes as well:
Docker now has a single command to do that:
docker system prune -a --volumes
See the Docker system prune docs
There are three areas of Docker storage that can mount up, because Docker is cautious - it doesn't automatically remove any of them: exited containers, unused container volumes, unused image layers. In a dev environment with lots of building and running, that can be a lot of disk space.
These three commands clear down anything not being used:
docker rm $(docker ps -f status=exited -aq) - remove stopped containers
docker rmi $(docker images -f "dangling=true" -q) - remove image layers that are not used in any images
docker volume rm $(docker volume ls -qf dangling=true) - remove volumes that are not used by any containers.
These are safe to run, they won't delete image layers that are referenced by images, or data volumes that are used by containers. You can alias them, and/or put them in a CRON job to regularly clean up the local disk.
It is also worth mentioning that file size of docker.qcow2 (or Docker.raw on High Sierra with Apple Filesystem) can seem very large (~64GiB), larger than it actually is, when using the following command:
ls -klsh Docker.raw
This can be somehow misleading because it will output the logical size of the file rather than its physical size.
To see the physical size of the file you can use this command:
du -h Docker.raw
Source: https://docs.docker.com/docker-for-mac/faqs/#disk-usage
Why does the file keep growing?
If Docker is used regularly, the size of the Docker.raw (or Docker.qcow2) can keep growing, even when files are deleted.
To demonstrate the effect, first check the current size of the file on the host:
$ cd ~/Library/Containers/com.docker.docker/Data/com.docker.driver.amd64-linux/
$ ls -s Docker.raw
9964528 Docker.raw
Note the use of -s which displays the number of filesystem blocks actually used by the file. The number of blocks used is not necessarily the same as the file “size”, as the file can be sparse.
Next start a container in a separate terminal and create a 1GiB file in it:
$ docker run -it alpine sh
# and then inside the container:
/ # dd if=/dev/zero of=1GiB bs=1048576 count=1024
1024+0 records in
1024+0 records out
/ # sync
Back on the host check the file size again:
$ ls -s Docker.raw
12061704 Docker.raw
Note the increase in size from 9964528 to 12061704, where the increase of 2097176 512-byte sectors is approximately 1GiB, as expected. If you switch back to the alpine container terminal and delete the file:
/ # rm -f 1GiB
/ # sync
then check the file on the host:
$ ls -s Docker.raw
12059672 Docker.raw
The file has not got any smaller! Whatever has happened to the file inside the VM, the host doesn’t seem to know about it.
Next if you re-create the “same” 1GiB file in the container again and then check the size again you will see:
$ ls -s Docker.raw
14109456 Docker.raw
It’s got even bigger! It seems that if you create and destroy files in a loop, the size of the Docker.raw (or Docker.qcow2) will increase up to the upper limit (currently set to 64 GiB), even if the filesystem inside the VM is relatively empty.
The explanation for this odd behaviour lies with how filesystems typically manage blocks. When a file is to be created or extended, the filesystem will find a free block and add it to the file. When a file is removed, the blocks become “free” from the filesystem’s point of view, but no-one tells the disk device. Making matters worse, the newly-freed blocks might not be re-used straight away – it’s completely up to the filesystem’s block allocation algorithm. For example, the algorithm might be designed to favour allocating blocks contiguously for a file: recently-freed blocks are unlikely to be in the ideal place for the file being extended.
Since the block allocator in practice tends to favour unused blocks, the result is that the Docker.raw (or Docker.qcow2) will constantly accumulate new blocks, many of which contain stale data. The file on the host gets larger and larger, even though the filesystem inside the VM still reports plenty of free space.
TRIM
A TRIM command (or a DISCARD or UNMAP) allows a filesystem to signal to a disk that a range of sectors contain stale data and they can be forgotten. This allows:
an SSD drive to erase and reuse the space, rather than spend time shuffling it around; and
Docker for Mac to deallocate the blocks in the host filesystem, shrinking the file.
So how do we make this work?
Automatic TRIM in Docker for Mac
In Docker for Mac 17.11 there is a containerd “task” called trim-after-delete listening for Docker image deletion events. It can be seen via the ctr command:
$ docker run --rm -it --privileged --pid=host walkerlee/nsenter -t 1 -m -u -i -n ctr t ls
TASK PID STATUS
vsudd 1741 RUNNING
acpid 871 RUNNING
diagnose 913 RUNNING
docker-ce 958 RUNNING
host-timesync-daemon 1046 RUNNING
ntpd 1109 RUNNING
trim-after-delete 1339 RUNNING
vpnkit-forwarder 1550 RUNNING
When an image deletion event is received, the process waits for a few seconds (in case other images are being deleted, for example as part of a docker system prune ) and then runs fstrim on the filesystem.
Returning to the example in the previous section, if you delete the 1 GiB file inside the alpine container
/ # rm -f 1GiB
then run fstrim manually from a terminal in the host:
$ docker run --rm -it --privileged --pid=host walkerlee/nsenter -t 1 -m -u -i -n fstrim /var/lib/docker
then check the file size:
$ ls -s Docker.raw
9965016 Docker.raw
The file is back to (approximately) it’s original size – the space has finally been freed!
Hopefully this blog will be helpful, also checkout the following macos docker utility scripts for this problem:
https://github.com/wanliqun/macos_docker_toolkit
Docker on Mac has an additional problem that is hurting a lot of people: the docker.qcow2 file can grow out of proportions (up to 64gb) and won't ever shrink back down on its own.
https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/371
As stated in one of the replies by djs55 this is in the planning to be fixed, but its not a quick fix. Quote:
The .qcow2 is exposed to the VM as a block device with a maximum size
of 64GiB. As new files are created in the filesystem by containers,
new sectors are written to the block device. These new sectors are
appended to the .qcow2 file causing it to grow in size, until it
eventually becomes fully allocated. It stops growing when it hits this
maximum size.
...
We're hoping to fix this in several stages: (note this is still at the
planning / design stage, but I hope it gives you an idea)
1) we'll switch to a connection protocol which supports TRIM, and
implement free-block tracking in a metadata file next to the qcow2.
We'll create a compaction tool which can be run offline to shrink the
disk (a bit like the qemu-img convert but without the dd if=/dev/zero
and it should be fast because it will already know where the empty
space is)
2) we'll automate running of the compaction tool over VM reboots,
assuming it's quick enough
3) we'll switch to an online compactor (which is a bit like a GC in a
programming language)
We're also looking at making the maximum size of the .qcow2
configurable. Perhaps 64GiB is too large for some environments and a
smaller cap would help?
Update 2019: many updates have been done to Docker for Mac since this answer was posted to help mitigate problems (notably: supporting a different filesystem).
Cleanup is still not fully automatic though, you may need to prune from time to time. For a single command that can help to cleanup disk space, see zhongjiajie's answer.
docker container prune
docker system prune
docker image prune
docker volume prune
Since nothing here was working for me, here's what I did. Check file size:
ls -lhks ~/Library/Containers/com.docker.docker//Data/vms/0/data/Docker.raw
Then in the docker desktop simply reduce the disk image size (I was using raw format). It will say it will delete everything, but by the time you are reading this post, you probably already have. So that creates a fresh new empty file.
i'm not sure if it is related to the current topic , but this been a solution for me personally
open docker settings -> resources -> disk image size - 16gb
There are several options on how to limit docker diskspace, I'd start by limiting/rotating the logs: Docker container logs taking all my disk space
E.g. if you have a recent docker version, you can start it with an --log-opt max-size=50m option per container.
Also - if you've got old, unused containers, you can consider having a look at the docker logs which are located at /var/lib/docker/containers/*/*-json.log
$ sudo docker system prune
WARNING! This will remove:
all stopped containers
all networks not used by at least one container
all dangling images
all dangling build cache
I am trying Docker for the first time and do not yet have a "mental model". Total beginner.
All the examples that I am looking at have included the --rm flag to run, such as
docker run -it --rm ...
docker container run -it --rm ...
Question:
Why do these commands include the --rm flag? I would think that if I were to go through the trouble of setting up or downloading a container with the good stuff in it, why remove it? I want to keep it to use again.
So, I know I have the wrong idea of Docker.
Containers are merely an instance of the image you use to run them.
The state of mind when creating a containerized app is not by taking a fresh, clean ubuntu container for instance, and downloading the apps and configurations you wish to have in it, and then let it run.
You should treat the container as an instance of your application, but your application is embedded into an image.
The proper usage would be creating a custom image, where you embed all your files, configurations, environment variables etc, into the image. Read more about Dockerfile and how it is done here
Once you did that, you have an image that contains everything, and in order to use your application, you just run the image with proper port settings or other dynamic variables, using docker run <your-image>
Running containers with --rm flag is good for those containers that you use for very short while just to accomplish something, e.g., compile your application inside a container, or just testing something that it works, and then you are know it's a short lived container and you tell your Docker daemon that once it's done running, erase everything related to it and save the disk space.
The flag --rm is used when you need the container to be deleted after the task for it is complete.
This is suitable for small testing or POC purposes and saves the headache for house keeping.
From https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/run/#clean-up---rm
By default a container’s file system persists even after the container exits. This makes debugging a lot easier (since you can inspect the final state) and you retain all your data by default. But if you are running short-term foreground processes, these container file systems can really pile up. If instead you’d like Docker to automatically clean up the container and remove the file system when the container exits, you can add the --rm flag
In short, it's useful to keep the host clean from stopped and unused containers.
When you run a container from an image using a simple command like (docker run -it ubuntu), it spins up a container. You attach to your container using docker attach container-name (or using exec for different session).
So, when you're within your container and working on it and you type exit or ctrl+z or any other way to come out of the container, other than ctrl+p+q, your container exits. That means that your container has stopped, but it is still available on your disk and you can start it again with : docker start container-name/ID.
But when you run the container with —rm tag, on exit, the container is deleted permanently.
I use --rm when connecting to running containers to perform some actions such as database backup or file copy. Here is an example:
docker run -v $(pwd):/mnt --link app_postgres_1:pg --rm postgres:9.5 pg_dump -U postgres -h pg -f /mnt/docker_pg.dump1 app_db
The above will connect a running container named 'app_postgres_1' and create a backup. Once the backup command completes, the container is fully deleted.
The "docker run rm " command makes us run a new container and later when our work is completed then it is deleted by saving the disk space.
The important thing to note is, the container is just like a class instance and not for data storage. We better delete them once the work is complete. When we start again, it starts fresh.
The question comes then If the container is deleted then what about the data in a container? The data is actually saved in the local system and get linked to it when the container is started. The concept is named as "Volume or shared volume".
I have a docker named volume for database data. Now the thing is that when the database container is down and I (or anyone) run docker system prune it deletes all the unused containers, images and volumes including the one with database data. Is there a way to make the volume undeletable unless it is explicitly told to?
I suppose I can just mount a host directory to the container without making it a docker volume (and therefore without the risk of deleting it), but using docker volume seems like a cleaner way to do it.
When you run docker system pruneit is going to wipe out everything. But if you do something like this docker run -d -p 8080:8080 -p 1521:1521 -v /Users/noname_dev/programming/oracle-database:/u01/app/oracle -e DBCA_TOTAL_MEMORY=1024 oracle-database
then /Users/noname_dev/programming/oracle-database will still be there on your local but the container will naturally be gone till you create it again.
I use portainer to manage containers and it works great.
https://portainer.io/
But when I connect to console, I get the command prompt of container. Is there any way to run simple commands like ls /home/ that will list the files on host?
In other words is there any image that will mount the file system of host server "as-is"?
Here's an example using docker command line:
$ docker run --rm -it -v ~/Desktop:/Desktop alpine:latest /bin/sh
/ # ls /Desktop/
You can extend the approach to as far as you need to. Experiment with it. Learn about the different mount options.
I know the Docker app on MacOS provides a way for default volume mounts. Portainer also claims to provide a volume management screen, am yet to use it.
Hope this helps.
If you're dealing with services, or an existing, running container, you can in most cases access the shell directly. Let's say you have a container called "meow". You can run:
docker exec -it meow bash
and it will drop you into the bash shell. You'll actually need to know if bash is installed, or try calling sh instead.
The "i" option indicates it should be interactive, and the "t" option indicates it should emulate a TTY terminal. When you're done, you can hit Ctrl+D to exit out of the container.
First of all: You never ever want to do so.
Volumes mounted to containers are used to persist the container's data as containers are designed to be volatile -(the container itself shouldn't persist it s state so restarting the container n number of times should result in the same container state each time it starts)- so think of the volume as a the database where all the data (state of the container) should be stored.
Seeing volumes this way makes it easier to decide against sharing the host's entire file system, as this container would have read write permissions over the host OS files itself which is a huge security threat .
Sharing volumes across containers is considered a bad container architecture let alone sharing the entirety of the host file system.
I would propose simple ssh (or remote desktop) to your host if you require access to it to run commands or tasks on your host.
OR if your container requires access to a specific folder for some reason then you should consider mounting or binding that folder to the container
docker run -d --name devtest --mount source=myvol2,target=/app nginx:latest
I would recommend copying the content of that folder into a docker managed volume (a folder under the docker/volumes tree) and binding the container to this volume instead of the original folder to minimize the impact of your container on your host's OS.
One of my steps in Dockerfile requires more than 10G space on disk. It really does. However, all the intermediate containers in docker build are created with 10G volumes.
What I did:
started dockerd with --storage-opt dm.basesize=25G (docker info says: Base Device Size: 26.84 GB)
disabled cache while building
re-pulled the base images
stopped docker, removed everything from the docker directory, and started it again
It's no good: df -h in an intermediate container still shows a 10G disk, and docker inspect of it shows "DeviceSize": "10737418240".
What have I missed? How do I increase the base volume size?
To grant containers access to more space, we need to take care of two things:
Make sure that dockerd is started with: --storage-opt dm.basesize=25G
Make sure that we pull a clean version of the image after increasing the basesize.
Example:
Start dockerd with:
--storage-opt dm.basesize=25G
Restart docker daemon
Checking the container size here will display the older value of 10G:
docker run -it --rm ubuntu:xenial df -h
Delete the image and repull it
docker rmi ubuntu:xenial
docker pull ubuntu:xenial
Confirm changes took place with the expected value of 25G:
docker run -it --rm ubuntu:xenial df -h
I am not sure if this problem has been resolved in the meantime or not. But if anyone stumbles across this in 2019 (or possibly later), the clean solution to this kind of problems is to switch to another storage backend.
To do this, copy all keepworthy Docker data to a safe location. Stop the Docker daemon. Delete /var/lib/docker (or move it away to allow a rollback if anything goes wrong). Then re-create an empty /var/lib/docker and add file daemon.json with the following content
{
"storage-driver": "overlay2"
}
Then, restart the Docker daemon and the artificial 10G limit is gone.
See the documentation for further details: https://docs.docker.com/storage/storagedriver/overlayfs-driver/
In case there is really no way around the DeviceSize thing, I remember once creating it by hand (in the sense of a dd command with the expected device size) and starting the Docker daemon afterwards. However, as of today, necessity for doing this should be gone.