Docker container disk size in mesos and marathon - docker

Does Marathon impose a disk space resource limit on Docker container applications? By default, I know that Docker containers can grow as needed in their host VMs, but when I tried to have Marathon and Mesos create and manage my Docker containers, I found that the container would run out of space during installation of packages. As it stands, I cannot just cache the installation of these packages in a prebuilt image.
So if Marathon does impose a disk space resource limit, is there a way to turn that off?

Marathon should not impose a size limit on your containers, and as far as I am aware there are no limitations to the size of a container that Marathon can run, so long as the box you are running Marathon and the containers on top of have sufficient resources allocated (remaining).
That being said, there is a great response by user mbarthelemy at this link where he goes into detail regarding devicemapper settings in Ubuntu that allow you to allocate disk size and network resources to each container on a docker level.

No. Marathon does not enforce any resource limits itself, although your app definition can declare cpu/memory/disk limits. It is up to Mesos to actually enforce these limits. Mesos 0.22 added support for disk quota isolation, but it is not enabled by default (check the slave's --isolators flag), so I doubt that was your problem.
What is the slave's --work_dir? If it's mapping to /tmp/mesos (default), and that happens to be a tiny ramdisk/SSD, you might actually be running out of space on the host machine/VM.

Related

What does host's top command show about CPU/Memory utilization by kubenetes pods

If I issue top command in a node of a kubenetes cluster, would it show CPU and Memory utilization of processes that are running inside docker as part of Kubenetes cluster? If so how would they be named?
As we can see from Isolate containers with a user namespace
Linux namespaces provide isolation for running processes, limiting their access to system resources without the running process being aware of the limitations
Docker uses Linux namespaces to isolate the processes, it never changes the fact, the processes running in docker is simply ones in host with limitations.
So you can always see the CPU and Memory utilization of all the processes inside or outside Docker.
For how would they be named, they named with the process name run inside docker.

Jenkins in a container is much slower than on the server itself

We recently had our jenkins redone. We decided to have the new version on a docker container on the server.
While migrating, I noticed that the jenkins is MUCH slower when its in a container than when it ran on the server itself.
This is a major issue and could mess up our migration.
I tried looking for ways to give more resources to the container with not much help.
How can I speed the jenkins container/ give it all the resources it needs on the server (the server is dedicated only to jenkins).
Also, how do I devide these resources when I want to start up slave containers as well?
Disk operations
One thing that can go slow with Docker is when the process running in a container is making a lot of I/O calls to the container file system. The container file system is a union file system which is not optimized for speed.
This is where docker volumes are useful. Additionally to providing a location on the file system which survives container deletion, disk performance on a docker volume is good.
The Jenkins Docker image defines the JENKINS_HOME location as a docker volume, so as long as your Jenkins jobs are making their disk operations within that location you should be fine.
If you determine that disk access on that volume is still too slow, you could customize the mount location of that volume on your docker host so that it would end up being mounted on a fast drive such as a SSD.
Another trick is to make a docker volume mounted to RAM with tmpfs. Note that such a volume does not offer persistence and that data at that location will be lost when the container is stopped or deleted.
JVM memory exhaustion / Garbage collector
As Jenkins is a Java application, another potential issue comes in mind: memory exhaustion. In the case the JVM on which the Jenkins process runs on is too limited in memory, the Java garbage collector will runs too frequently. You can witness that when you realize your Java app is using too much CPU (the garbage collector uses CPU). If that is the case, give more memory to the JVM:
docker run-p 8080:8080 -p 50000:50000 --env JAVA_OPTS="-Xmx2048m -Djava.awt.headless=true" jenkins/jenkins:lts
Network
Docker containers have a virtual network stack and custom network settings. You also want to make sure that all network related operation are fast.
The DNS server might be an issue, check it by executing ping <some domain name> from the Jenkins container.

Bandwidth and Disk space for Docker container

Does docker container get the same band-width as the host container? Or do we need to configure min and(or) max. I 've noticed that we need to override default RAM(which is 2 GB) and Swap space configuration if we need to run CPU intensive jobs.
Also do we need to configure the disk-space ? Or does it by default get as much space as the actual hard disk.
Memory and CPU are controlled using cgroups by docker. If you do not configure these, they are unrestricted and can use all of the memory and CPU on the docker host. If you run in a VM, which includes all Docker for Desktop installs, then you will be limited to that VM's resources.
Disk space is usually limited to the disk space available in /var/lib/docker. For that reason, many make this a different mount. If you use devicemapper for docker's graph driver (this has been largely deprecated), created preallocated blocks of disk space, and you can control that block size. You can restrict containers by running them with read-only root filesystems, and mounting volumes into the container that have a limited disk space. I've seen this done with loopback device mounts, but it requires some configuration outside of docker to setup the loopback device. With a VM, you will again be limited by the disk space allocated to that VM.
Network bandwidth is by default unlimited. I have seen an interesting project called docker-tc which monitors containers for their labels and updates bandwidth settings for a container using tc (traffic control).
Does docker container get the same band-width as the host container?
Yes. There is no limit imposed on network utilization. You could maybe impose limits using a bridge network.
Also do we need to configure the disk-space ? Or does it by default get as much space as the actual hard disk.
It depends on which storage driver you're using because each has its own options. For example, devicemapper uses 10G by default but can be configured to use more. The recommended driver now is overlay2. To configure start docker with overlay2.size.
This depends some on what your host system is and how old it is.
In all cases network bandwidth isn't explicitly limited or allocated between the host and containers; a container can do as much network I/O as it wants up to the host's limitations.
On current native Linux there isn't a desktop application and docker info will say something like Storage driver: overlay2 (overlay and aufs are good here too). There are no special limitations on memory, CPU, or disk usage; in all cases a container can use up to the full physical host resources, unless limited with a docker run option.
On older native Linux there isn't a desktop application and docker info says Storage driver: devicemapper. (Consider upgrading your host!) All containers and images are stored in a separate filesystem and the size of that is limited (it is included in the docker info output); named volumes and host bind mounts live outside this space. Again, memory and CPU are not intrinsically limited.
Docker Toolbox and Docker for Mac both use virtual machines to provide a Linux kernel to non-Linux hosts. If you see a "memory" slider you are probably using a solution like this. Disk use for containers, images, and named volumes is limited to the VM capacity, along with memory and CPU. Host bind mounts generally get passed through to the host system.

How did docker daemon limit container's disk bandwidth like docker run --device-read-bps

We can limit container's disk bandwidth when create it by using docker run --device-read-bps. Actually I'm using kubernetes to create container. Want make every container in my node use only 50M/s disk bandwidth .
Is there any way can configure docker daemon like docker run --device-read-bps?
Kubernetes supports CPU and Memory limits, but as far as I know, it does not handle any disk quota or limits at this time.
In PersistentVolumes, you can specify StorageClass, but that only seems to imply slow or fast disk (i.e. HD or SSD..) and that does not have any bandwidth limitation.
So in short I do not think it is possible.

How does docker use CPU cores from its host operating system?

My understading, based on the fact that Docker is based on LXC, is that Docker containers share various resources from its host operating system. My concern is with CPU cores. Here is a scenario:
a host linux OS has 8 cores
I have to deploy a set of docker containers on the host OS above.
Some of the docker containers that I need to deploy would be better suited to use 2 cores
a) So if I run all of the docker containers on that host, will they consume CPU/cores as needed like if they were being run as normal installed applications on that host OS ?
b) Will the docker container consume its own process and all of the processing that is contained in it will be stuck to that parent process's CPU core ?
c) How can I specify a docker container to use a number of cores ( 4 for example ). I saw there is a -C flag that can point to a core id, but it appears there is no option to specify the container to pick N cores at random.
Currently, I don't think docker provides this level of granularity. It doesn't specify how many cores it allocates in its lxc.conf files, so you will get all cores for each docker, potentially (or possibly 1, I'm not 100% sure on that).
However, you could tweak the conf file generated for a given container and set something like
cpuset {
cpuset.cpus="0-3";
}
It might be that things changed in the latest (few) versions. Nowadays you can constrain your docker container with parameters for docker run:
The equivalent for the current answer in the new docker version is
docker run ubuntu /bin/echo 'Hello world --cpuset-cpus="0-3"
However, this will limit the docker process to these CPU, but (please correct me if I am wrong) other containers could also request the same set.
A possibly better way would be to use CPU shares.
For more information see https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/run/
From ORACLE documentation:
To control a container's CPU usage, you can use the
--cpu-period and --cpu-quota options with the docker
create and docker run commands from version 1.7.0 of Docker onward.
The --cpu-quota option specifies the number of microseconds
that a container has access to CPU resources during a
period specified by --cpu-period.
As the default value of --cpu-period is 100000, setting the
value of --cpu-quota to 25000 limits a container to 25% of
the CPU resources. By default, a container can use all available CPU resources,
which corresponds to a --cpu-quota value of -1.
So if I run all of the docker containers on that host, will they consume CPU/cores as needed like if they were being run as normal installed applications on that host OS?
Yes.
CPU
By default, each container’s access to the host machine’s CPU cycles is unlimited. You can set various constraints to limit a given container’s access to the host machine’s CPU cycles.
Will the docker container consume its own process and all of the processing that is contained in it will be stuck to that parent process's CPU core?
Nope.
Docker uses Completely Fair Scheduler for sharing CPU resources among containers. So containers have configurable access to CPU.
How can I specify a docker container to use a number of cores ( 4 for example ). I saw there is a -C flag that can point to a core id, but it appears there is no option to specify the container to pick N cores at random.
It is overconfigurable. There are more cpu options in Docker which you can combine.
--cpus= Specify how much of the available CPU resources a container can use. For instance, if the host machine has two CPUs and you set --cpus="1.5", the container is guaranteed at most one and a half of the CPUs.
--cpuset-cpus Limit the specific CPUs or cores a container can use. A comma-separated list or hyphen-separated range of CPUs a container can use, if you have more than one CPU. The first CPU is numbered 0. A valid value might be 0-3 (to use the first, second, third, and fourth CPU) or 1,3 (to use the second and fourth CPU).
And more...

Resources