Replies: 3 comments
|
I second this, right now my container manager is super cluttered with various TypeType containers: I am also not sure why they get all the suffix "-1". |
0 replies
|
Hey @arcoast, @Toni-Vide, yeah I agree, the one-shot init containers make the stack look more cluttered than it should :p The I’m keeping this as an installation cleanup item. The temporary bootstrap services should be clearly separated from the long-running services, and the documentation should explain exactly which containers are expected to exit. If it doesn’t bother u, could u open an issue for this? It would really help me keep track of it :) Thx for pointing this out! |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
I know we've discussed this before, but it's occurred to me we currently have three containers, with the sole purpose of initialising things for a new install, that are then never used again, but still have dependent containers
Other than the postgres-init container which needs postgres, the other two are just shell scripts. My thought is a couple of different options.
Amalgamate into a single script run via a customised container for at least typetype-secrets & garage-config, even consider making a single init container with postgres installed to perform all the init steps that can then be removed.
This could be documented with as a preinstall step.
example.envand mv to.envWhilst the project uses docker volumes by standard, personally I've changed to using bind mounts as that's my preference, but either way the volume mapping host side could be achieved with some environmental variables.
The other option I thought of, is to incorporate the init procedure into existing containers, the downside of this is whichever container we used would require volume mounts to provide access that it wouldn't normally need.
All reactions