docker utilization for plugins

  • Wow... this looks quite interesting.


    I had a look at the introductions and it sounds like a nice solution. Have to look further how it runs on debian so far.


    Greetings
    David

    "Well... lately this forum has become support for everything except omv" [...] "And is like someone is banning Google from their browsers"


    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

    Upload Logfile via WebGUI/CLI
    #openmediavault on freenode IRC | German & English | GMT+1
    Absolutely no Support via PM!

  • I watched 4 videos earlier, including the one where the main dev speaks about it at twitter universe.


    What I found so far that from the Developers page, it certainly is not supported to be run on Debian. However I found a tutorial on how to install it to debian (wheezy however).


    Greetings
    David

    "Well... lately this forum has become support for everything except omv" [...] "And is like someone is banning Google from their browsers"


    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

    Upload Logfile via WebGUI/CLI
    #openmediavault on freenode IRC | German & English | GMT+1
    Absolutely no Support via PM!

  • Alltough they mention it on theire 0.7 release article, no one has yet created a full guide for debian according to that overview: http://docs.docker.io/en/latest/installation/


    Greetings
    David

    "Well... lately this forum has become support for everything except omv" [...] "And is like someone is banning Google from their browsers"


    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

    Upload Logfile via WebGUI/CLI
    #openmediavault on freenode IRC | German & English | GMT+1
    Absolutely no Support via PM!

  • Could be a solution, but what about users complaining this:

    Zitat

    I upgraded program X to version Y in Debian, but OMV is still showing version Z?


    Edit: A alternative for websites is bitnami: http://bitnami.com/stacks

  • User complaining? Why should they complain, if they are taught how plugins with docker work.


    Greetings
    David

    "Well... lately this forum has become support for everything except omv" [...] "And is like someone is banning Google from their browsers"


    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

    Upload Logfile via WebGUI/CLI
    #openmediavault on freenode IRC | German & English | GMT+1
    Absolutely no Support via PM!

    • Offizieller Beitrag

    Seems interesting. I think it would complicate plugins. Install would be easier but communication and file access become an issue very similar to VMs.


    Example... If you wanted the latest ffmpeg and needed newer libraries but didn't want to install them on your system. You install a Docker module/jail/whatever they are called. How does this new system access the files you want to encode? NFS? Samba? You can't really tell it use Shared Folder #1. And while it is idling/running, how does the plugin get information from it/start/stop it? Maybe someone can come up with plugins that work well with it (dnsmasq might).

    omv 7.0.4-2 sandworm | 64 bit | 6.5 proxmox kernel

    plugins :: omvextrasorg 7.0 | kvm 7.0.10 | compose 7.1.2 | k8s 7.0-6 | cputemp 7.0 | mergerfs 7.0.3


    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please try ctrl-shift-R and read this before posting a question.

    Please put your OMV system details in your signature.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • Thats already a concern that I already thought about. It should be possible to run a nfs client, besides a normal process within the container (thats the way they are called). Also these containers are for now limited to one process.


    Services that should run well with it like mysql or similiar services. Nothing that needs to access your local filesystem. I've already watched much about Docker and know how it works but I've not yet seen how you work around those requests. I know its possible to run multiple processes within one container, but its a bit hacky. Not sure if screen works within a container.


    Edit: Nevermind. Its already possible, see SECOND answer: http://stackoverflow.com/quest…em-to-container-in-docker


    Hmm....


    Greetings
    David

    "Well... lately this forum has become support for everything except omv" [...] "And is like someone is banning Google from their browsers"


    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

    Upload Logfile via WebGUI/CLI
    #openmediavault on freenode IRC | German & English | GMT+1
    Absolutely no Support via PM!

  • I think this idea of using docker for plugins/applications is brilliant for things like sickbeard, snapraid, mysql, etc... OMV could actually use application images that people created for unraid :) since they are not platform dependent (half the work is already done for you).


    You share the configs and data folders of the apps w/ your host system (see my link after the quote below) and with any other containers OR use a data-only container (http://www.tech-d.net/2013/12/…tainer-as-volume-pattern/)


    This makes the updating of applications super easy. Also makes backing up stuff easy (just backup config and data directory... or the data-only container). If you ever have to re-install OMV, just copy in the config/data backups and start up the containers. Done. You don't have to worry stuff like, "does this version of debian store the mysql conf here... or there. You don't care b/c you tell the container where to store it.


    I am going to be slimming down my xenserver (with OMV, windows server, mythtv backend, couple other servers on it) to an OMV install and use docker containers for everything else (and ditch my windows server). Now that unrain is using docker for applications AND supports KVM (experimental) I'm VERY tempted to buy an unraid license.




    Edit: Nevermind. Its already possible, see SECOND answer: http://stackoverflow.com/quest…em-to-container-in-docker


    Check this out: https://docs.docker.com/userguide/dockervolumes/

  • I didn't like shipyard back then but panamax sounds really awesome, well, the vid looks awesome.


    Had a deeper look. Yup. Panamax sounds like a good solution:

    Externer Inhalt www.youtube.com
    Inhalte von externen Seiten werden ohne Ihre Zustimmung nicht automatisch geladen und angezeigt.
    Durch die Aktivierung der externen Inhalte erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass personenbezogene Daten an Drittplattformen übermittelt werden. Mehr Informationen dazu haben wir in unserer Datenschutzerklärung zur Verfügung gestellt.


    Greetings
    David

    "Well... lately this forum has become support for everything except omv" [...] "And is like someone is banning Google from their browsers"


    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

    Upload Logfile via WebGUI/CLI
    #openmediavault on freenode IRC | German & English | GMT+1
    Absolutely no Support via PM!

    Einmal editiert, zuletzt von davidh2k ()

  • I have a decent amount of docker experience. We use docker for our production servers at work. Panamax has a ton of bugs, is slow, and requires you to run it on coreos (which means run it in a virtualbox VM). It essentially complicates things that don't need to be complicated.


    A native docker interface for OMV would be great. There are a bunch of different libraries: https://docs.docker.com/refere…ote_api_client_libraries/. I wouldn't think a simple interface for OMV would be that hard. OMV is very specific and doesn't need stuff like orchestration, advanced docker networking, etc...

  • I've been playing with Docker for a couple of months now, and I'm really getting to like it. I've been using both Debian Jessie and Wheezy, and have happily developed Dockerfiles for sabnzbd, sickbeard, couchpotato, headphones, mylar and transmission. Last night I got Docker up and running in a VirtualBox instance of Krazelic, and I'm slowly testing my Dockerfiles in an OMV environment. My initial impressions are that it works very well, although you need to install the backports kernel to get it working.


    IMHO, a basic docker interface for Open Media Vault would have really big benefits. Once I got a sense of what I was doing, I found that I could put together a functional dockerfile really quickly... and I'm by no means an expert. In doing my research I discovered that unRaid has implemented a docker interface -- which I assume makes plugin development really quick for them. Previously, this was a real weakness of unRaid and now, I think, they've turned it into a strength.

  • Tyberious Funk, Have you run into any issues running docker on debian? I've used docker on a lot of other systems, but not yet on debian. Looking at the docs, it just looks like I need backport kernels (like you said), but other then that, it should work fine.


    unRaids ability to do docker and kvm now makes it very attractive. I almost bought it the other day when they had a sale :P. OMV with docker would be sooo sweet.

  • Running in Jessie, I had no issues. On Wheezy, as you point out, you need a backports kernel. On a plain vanilla wheezy install, I just followed the standard process for installing from backports then ran the installation script. Basically, exactly as described on the Docker website -- https://docs.docker.com/installation/debian/


    On OMV, I don't know if there is a "preferred" method for getting a backports kernel, but I just installed the extras repository package, then installed the kernel via the interface. And then, again, installed docker from the install script they provide. No dramas. I only found a couple of minor issues with running docker from wheezy. Mostly from a few online guides that assume your system is running systemd (which wheezy doesn't).


    I think docker is going to be a big benefit to me. I use OMV for my home NAS, which has very quickly become the centre of entertainment in the house. I get more and more nervous about running and updating software on it, and the potential for breaking things, but I can't really justify buying a second development and testing box. Docker gives me the ability to isolate applications, fire up a container for temporary needs, run applications designed for different distributions or different versions of linux... it's all very nice.

  • I used to run xenserver for my home server. I could have mythtv, omv, windows server, etc... It was nice from a standpoint that it was easy to whip up a test server.... but its really a pain from a storage standpoint since xenserver has all sorts of limitations for drive passthrough.


    Now with docker, I can do almost everything I was doing in xenserver, but with smaller, faster containers. The whole methodology is different, but better since all my changes to the containers are documented and it forces me to automate my "server" (container) configuration. I can still use virtualbox (or even kvm if I get ambitious) for the weird one-off servers (like windows).


    Docker makes updateing apps (sonarr/sickbeard, sab, plex, etc...) sooo easy and worry free.


    With a docker interface for OMV, many of the omv plugins (that need updating all the time) will no longer be needed.

    • Offizieller Beitrag


    Docker makes updateing apps (sonarr/sickbeard, sab, plex, etc...) sooo easy and worry free.


    With a docker interface for OMV, many of the omv plugins (that need updating all the time) will no longer be needed.


    Can you explain these two comments more?

    omv 7.0.4-2 sandworm | 64 bit | 6.5 proxmox kernel

    plugins :: omvextrasorg 7.0 | kvm 7.0.10 | compose 7.1.2 | k8s 7.0-6 | cputemp 7.0 | mergerfs 7.0.3


    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please try ctrl-shift-R and read this before posting a question.

    Please put your OMV system details in your signature.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!


  • Can you explain these two comments more?


    When you build an application in a Docker container, the container is more or less isolated from the host system. For example, you may run OMV as your host system, but deploy sickbeard in a Docker container based on Ubuntu 14.04. If/when you upgrade OMV, the Docker container remains running in Ubuntu 14.04. On the flip side, you could upgrade your container from Ubuntu 14.04 to 14.10, while leaving your OMV host completely untouched. And of course, you can mix and match containers based on different images. I'm testing Docker on OMV (based on Debian Wheezy, obviously), but the majority of my containers are using Debian Jessie, but with one container running Ubuntu 14.04. Basically, you use the distribution for your container that is most suitable to the needs of the application -- and you don't need to worry about interdependency issues across other containers (or with the host system), because they are isolated.


    For anyone used to running virtualisation, this doesn't really seem like a big deal. eg, I can set up various virtualbox instances with different applications running in each. But the big advantage to Docker is that you get the benefits of virtualisation with really minimal overhead. Once you have images built, you can spawn a new container based on the image within a fraction of a second. In fact, it's so fast, you can use a single command to spawn a container, run a command (or application or script) inside the container, get the results, and have the container close down... almost at the same speed as if you ran the command directly on the host.


    The other big advantage is that it is really quick and simple to build images. Images are basically static templates that you spawn containers from. A single Dockerfile contains the instructions to build an image with whatever application you want. The reason it works so nicely, is because the Dockerfile specifies the distribution for it to be based on. For example, I can write a Dockerfile for installing sickbeard inside a Fedora 19 container. And I KNOW the build instructions will work, because i've tested them in Fedora 19. And it doesn't matter what your host machine is, if you run my Dockerfile, the image WILL BE based on Fedora 19. This portability makes Dockerfiles ideal for sharing. And creating Dockerfiles is really, really easy.


    IMHO, for unRaid it's a MASSIVE win. One of the big "flaws" in unRaid is the difficulty in installing new apps. Partly, this is because unRaid loads from a USB and runs in memory, so you have to get around that limitation. And partly because it is based on Slackware, which isn't the friendliest distribution when it comes to package management and resolving dependencies. Now, with Docker, people can write Dockerfiles based on Ubuntu or Debian, and run them on unRaid.

Jetzt mitmachen!

Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!