I have a windows service that I want to run in a docker container on Azure.
I would like to have the same setup when running the service locally, so I would like to run the same docker container locally as a windows service (I think?).
How would I do that? Or is there a better approach?
Thanks,
Michael
IMHO Michael asked how to start docker images without the need to have a user logged in. The docker restart flag actually only deals with starting images after docker is running. To get docker to run without logged in user (or after automatic windows updates) it seems to me you will also need to make a windows service that runs docker.
A good explanation for this part of the problem can be found here (no good solution has been found yet without paying for it - docker team ignored request to make this work without third party so far):
How to start Docker daemon (windows service) at startup without the need to log-in?
You can use the flag --restart=unless-stopped with the docker run command and the docker container will run automatically even if the server was shutdown.
Further read for the restart policy and flag here
but conditions apply - docker itself should always run on startup. which is default setting by itself.
Related
I'm running Jenkins inside a Docker container. I wonder if it's ok for the Jenkins container to also be a Docker host? What I'm thinking about is to start a new docker container for each integration test build from inside Jenkins (to start databases, message brokers etc). The containers should thus be shutdown after the integration tests are completed. Is there a reason to avoid running docker containers from inside another docker container in this way?
Running Docker inside Docker (a.k.a. dind), while possible, should be avoided, if at all possible. (Source provided below.) Instead, you want to set up a way for your main container to produce and communicate with sibling containers.
Jérôme Petazzoni — the author of the feature that made it possible for Docker to run inside a Docker container — actually wrote a blog post saying not to do it. The use case he describes matches the OP's exact use case of a CI Docker container that needs to run jobs inside other Docker containers.
Petazzoni lists two reasons why dind is troublesome:
It does not cooperate well with Linux Security Modules (LSM).
It creates a mismatch in file systems that creates problems for the containers created inside parent containers.
From that blog post, he describes the following alternative,
[The] simplest way is to just expose the Docker socket to your CI container, by bind-mounting it with the -v flag.
Simply put, when you start your CI container (Jenkins or other), instead of hacking something together with Docker-in-Docker, start it with:
docker run -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock ...
Now this container will have access to the Docker socket, and will therefore be able to start containers. Except that instead of starting "child" containers, it will start "sibling" containers.
I answered a similar question before on how to run a Docker container inside Docker.
To run docker inside docker is definitely possible. The main thing is that you run the outer container with extra privileges (starting with --privileged=true) and then install docker in that container.
Check this blog post for more info: Docker-in-Docker.
One potential use case for this is described in this entry. The blog describes how to build docker containers within a Jenkins docker container.
However, Docker inside Docker it is not the recommended approach to solve this type of problems. Instead, the recommended approach is to create "sibling" containers as described in this post
So, running Docker inside Docker was by many considered as a good type of solution for this type of problems. Now, the trend is to use "sibling" containers instead. See the answer by #predmijat on this page for more info.
It's OK to run Docker-in-Docker (DinD) and in fact Docker (the company) has an official DinD image for this.
The caveat however is that it requires a privileged container, which depending on your security needs may not be a viable alternative.
The alternative solution of running Docker using sibling containers (aka Docker-out-of-Docker or DooD) does not require a privileged container, but has a few drawbacks that stem from the fact that you are launching the container from within a context that is different from that one in which it's running (i.e., you launch the container from within a container, yet it's running at the host's level, not inside the container).
I wrote a blog describing the pros/cons of DinD vs DooD here.
Having said this, Nestybox (a startup I just founded) is working on a solution that runs true Docker-in-Docker securely (without using privileged containers). You can check it out at www.nestybox.com.
Yes, we can run docker in docker, we'll need to attach the unix socket /var/run/docker.sock on which the docker daemon listens by default as volume to the parent docker using -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock.
Sometimes, permissions issues may arise for docker daemon socket for which you can write sudo chmod 757 /var/run/docker.sock.
And also it would require to run the docker in privileged mode, so the commands would be:
sudo chmod 757 /var/run/docker.sock
docker run --privileged=true -v /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock -it ...
I was trying my best to run containers within containers just like you for the past few days. Wasted many hours. So far most of the people advise me to do stuff like using the docker's DIND image which is not applicable for my case, as I need the main container to be Ubuntu OS, or to run some privilege command and map the daemon socket into container. (Which never ever works for me)
The solution I found was to use Nestybox on my Ubuntu 20.04 system and it works best. Its also extremely simple to execute, provided your local system is ubuntu (which they support best), as the container runtime are specifically deigned for such application. It also has the most flexible options. The free edition of Nestybox is perhaps the best method as of Nov 2022. Highly recommends you to try it without bothering all the tedious setup other people suggest. They have many pre-constructed solutions to address such specific needs with a simple command line.
The Nestybox provide special runtime environment for newly created docker container, they also provides some ubuntu/common OS images with docker and systemd in built.
Their goal is to make the main container function exactly the same as a virtual machine securely. You can literally ssh into your ubuntu main container as well without the ability to access anything in the main machine. From your main container you may create all kinds of containers like a normal local system does. That systemd is very important for you to setup docker conveniently inside the container.
One simple common command to execute sysbox:
dock run --runtime=sysbox-runc -it any_image
If you think thats what you are looking for, you can find out more at their github:
https://github.com/nestybox/sysbox
Quicklink to instruction on how to deploy a simple sysbox runtime environment container: https://github.com/nestybox/sysbox/blob/master/docs/quickstart/README.md
Is it possible to set up JHipster console on Docker Cloud? My application is deployed on Heroku.
If is there no option, please advise where can I set up docker in cloud.
Regards!
Yes docker cloud is an option although I've never tried it. If you have simple needs and don't need container orchestration on multiple hosts I would recommend creating a simple VM with docker on your favorite cloud provider (using docker-machine for example) and then deploy the console there using docker-compose. It's really easy to do.
1) SSH on your server
2) Install docker and docker-compose
3) Get the docker-compose file from https://github.com/jhipster/jhipster-console/blob/master/bootstrap/docker-compose.yml
4) Run docker-compose up -d
The console will be available on port 5601.
Refer to the docs at : https://jhipster.github.io/monitoring/
More advanced setup are possible but this is the easiest way to go. Also note that it is perfectly possible to run the JHipster-Console without Docker but it requires some work. To do this, setup an ELK stack yourself usinh on simple logstash configuration and scripts to preload the dashboards.
Ok, locally everything is fine. So how (step by step) push JHipster Console to docker-cloud and connect it with my application on heroku?
Faced with this screen, I have managed to easily deploy a rails app to azure, on docker container app service, but logging it is a pain since the only way they have access to logs is through FTP.
Has anyone figured out a good way to running the docker run command inside azure so it essentially accepts any params.
in this case it's trying to simply log to a remote service, if anyone also has other suggestions of retrieving logs except FTP, would massively appreciate.
No, at the time of writing this is not possible, you can only pass in anything that you would normally pass to docker run container:tag %YOUR_STARTUP_COMMAND_WILL_GO_HERE_AS_IS%, so after your container name.
TLDR you cannot pass any startup parameters to Linux WebApp except for the command that needs to be run in the container. Lets say you want to run your container called MYPYTHON using the PROD tag and run some python code, you would do something like this
Startup Command = /usr/bin/python3 /home/code/my_python_entry_point.py
and that would get appended (AT THE VERY END ONLY) to the actual docker command:
docker run -t username/MYPYTHON:PROD /usr/bin/python3 /home/code/my_python_entry_point.py
I'm trying to work on a dev environment with Node.js and Docker.
I want to be able to:
run my docker container when I boot my computer once and for all;
make changes in my local source code and see the changes without interacting with the docker container (with a mount).
I've tried the Node image and, if I understand correctly, it is not what I'm looking for.
I know how to make the mount point, but I'm missing how the server is supposed to detect the changes and "relaunch" itself.
I'm new to Node.js so if there is a better way to do things, feel free to share.
run my docker container when I boot my computer once and for all;
start containers automatically with the docker daemon or with your process manager
make changes in my local source code and see the changes without
interacting with the docker container (with a mount).
You need to mount your dev app folder as a volume
$ docker run --name myapp -v /app/src:/app image/app
and set in your Dockerfile nodeJs
CMD ["nodemon", "-L", "/app"]
I just created a secure Docker Registry and ran it on a remote VM (using docker run ...). I then ran docker ps and saw that it is in fact running. I exited the machine and then SSHed back in. Again, I ran docker ps and verified it "survived" me exiting the SSH session.
This has me wondering: do Docker containers actually run as Linux services? If not, is there any way of getting them to run as traditional (upstart- or systemd-based) services? Is there even any reason/merit to do so?
The docker engine runs as a daemon.
That is mentioned in "Host integration":
As of Docker 1.2, restart policies are the built-in Docker mechanism for restarting containers when they exit. If set, restart policies will be used when the Docker daemon starts up, as typically happens after a system boot. Restart policies will ensure that linked containers are started in the correct order.
If restart policies don’t suit your needs (i.e., you have non-Docker processes that depend on Docker containers), you can use a process manager like upstart, systemd or supervisor instead.
That involves (when a container runs with some options) some security fraught, by the way: see issue 14767 and issue 6401:
The container (with --net host option) is the host when it comes to the network stack so any services running on the host are accessible to the container. It just so happens that you communicate to upstart ( and others ) this way.
This feature is a runtime only option, just like the --privileged flag, therefore an image cannot request this, it must be explicitly set at runtime.