I am running postgresql in a docker container. Now I wanted to add checksums to the database cluster. So I stopped the docker container and waited some time. But the pg_checksums tool is still complaining:
pg_checksums: error: cluster must be shut down
There is no postgres or similar running any longer, with docker or not.
Renaming the file postmaster.pid did not change anything.
What du I need to do to convince pg_checksums that it can savely work on the cluster data?
I'm using postgresql 12 and Docker version 19.03.13, build 4484c46d9d on a CentOS 8 machine.
You need to shutdown the database cleanly. Shutting down the container itself apparently did not do that. A tool which does not attach to PostgreSQL's shared memory has no way to know whether a database has crashed, or is still running. So you need a clean shutdown.
Related
I'm trying to get RabbitMQ to monitor a postgresql database to create a message queue when database rows are updated. The eventual plan is to feed this message queue into an AWS EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Service) cluster as a job.
I've read many many approaches to this but they are still confusing as a newcomer to RabbitMQ and many seemed to be written more than 5 years ago so I'm not sure if they'll still work with current versions of postgres and rabbitmq.
I've followed this guide about installing the area51/notify-rabbit docker container which can connect the two via a node app, but when I ran the docker container it immediately stopped and didn't seem to do anything.
There is also this guide, which uses a go app to connect the two, but I'd rather not use Go ouside of a docker container.
Additionally, there is also this method, to install the pg_amqp extension from a repository which hasn't been updated in years, which allows for a direct connection from PostgreSQL to RabbitMQ. However, when I followed this and attempted to install pg_amqp on my Postgres db (postgresql 12), I was unable to connect using psql to the database, getting the classic error:
psql: could not connect to server: No such file or directory
Is the server running locally and accepting
connections on Unix domain socket "/tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432"?
My current set-up, is I have a rabbitMQ server installed in a docker container in an AWS EC2 instance which I can access via the internet. I ran the following to install and run it:
docker pull rabbitmq:3-management
docker run --rm -p 15672:15672 -p 5672:5672 rabbitmq:3-management
The postgresql database is running on a separate EC2 instance and both instances have the required ports open for accessing data from each server.
I have also looked into using Amazon SQS as well for this, but it didn't seem to have any info on linking Postgresql up to it. I haven't really seen any guides or Stack Overflow questions on this since 2017/18 so I'm wondering if this is still the best way to create a message broker for a kubernetes system? Any help/pointers on this much appreciated.
In the end, I decided the best thing to do was create some simple Python scripts to do the LISTEN/NOTIFY steps and route traffic from PostgreSQL to RabbitMQ based off the following code https://gist.github.com/kissgyorgy/beccba1291de962702ea9c237a900c79
I set it up inside Docker containers and set them to run in my Kubernetes cluster so they are within the automatic restarts if they fail.
I usually use the default network for docker containers, and I had a mongo database running in one just fine and the port was exposed to the network successfully. Then, I tried to attach a new python container to that container using the --link option (yes, I now realize that that is deprecated). An error was thrown, and in my hubris, I didn't capture it, I just went on. Now, when I try to start my mongo database, it fails saying that it can't bind the network. "Failed to set up listener: SocketException: Permission denied"
I removed the container and tried to re-create it, but no luck. I've put this into a permanent state of bad. Any suggestions on how to fix this so I can get my database back?
Thanks.
Edit: Should have mentioned, Ubuntu 20.04, Docker 19.03.11
Also, this only seems to be a problem with any new mongo containers. I can start postgres, and web servers, etc without issues.
Turns out, whatever that error was when I tried to use --link, it had corrupted the mongo image on my machine, so all new instances of that image failed to connect to the network. That's why removing the container and recreating it didn't fix the problem. I needed to delete the local mongo image, and re-pull from the docker hub.
I sometimes stop/start docker very often when I am release new features in my application.
docker-compose up -d
docker-compose stop
I am using pretty much the bare bones postgres docker setup (see below).
I am mapping the /data folder to my host.
Is there anything I should be worried about if I stop/start docker many times in a day in terms of data getting corrupted?
Is calling docker-compose stop the best way to be stopping my postgres instance?
My postgres service in my docker-compose looks like this:
db:
image: postgres:9.4
volumes:
- "/home/deploy/data/pgdata:/var/lib/postgresql/data"
restart: always
This setup currently is running smoothly in development, but once it goes to production I want to make sure I am following best practices etc.
Use,
docker-compose down -v
What it does is basically removes all the volumes you added. If you don't those volumes will hang on and eat up your space. It only removes the volume inside the docker container. The volume in your host stays and survives container removal in case if you want that data to survive container removal.
Whenever you create a docker container by docker run, Docker creates a volume/ directory to keep the details about the containers. After you execute docker run, if you look into /var/lib/docker/containers, you will see one directory for each container you started. If you have not removed the volumes for previous container, you will see many directories under the "container" directory. The name of these directories will be very long random letters and number. So, if you don't tell the docker to remove these directories when you stop the container, it will be there forever. The v option I mentioned above, will delete these directories when you take down the container.
Keep in mind, you can view the contents of the directory /var/lib/docker only as a root user. To change to root user, use sudo -i before you attempt to view the contents of the directory.
Databases in particular are usually designed so that it's very hard to lose data, even if the machine loses power in the middle of writing something to disk. (This comes at some performance cost.) So long as you don't have more than one PostgreSQL instance at a time using the same backing data store, I'd expect it to not lose data or otherwise corrupt itself; the worst you should expect to see is a message at startup that it's recovering from a write-ahead log or something along those lines.
docker stop will send a signal to a container that prompts it to shut down cleanly, and PostgreSQL will take this as a cue to shut down. It looks like docker-compose stop, docker-compose down, and sending ^C to docker-compose up all use the same mechanism. So the way you're doing it now should result in a clean shutdown (provided PostgreSQL finishes its cleanup within 10 seconds).
I believe you can docker-compose restart specific services, or docker-compose up --force-recreate them. This would help if you rebuilt your application container and needed to restart that, but not its database.
I'm new to docker. I'm still trying to wrap my head around all this.
I'm building a node application (REST api), using Postgresql to store my data.
I've spent a few days learning about docker, but I'm not sure whether I'm doing things the way I'm supposed to.
So here are my questions:
I'm using the official docker postgres 9.5 image as base to build my own (my Dockerfile only adds plpython on top of it, and installs a custom python module for use within plpython stored procedures). I created my container as suggedsted by the postgres image docs:
docker run --name some-postgres -e POSTGRES_PASSWORD=mysecretpassword -d postgres
After I stop the container I cannot run it again using the above command, because the container already exists. So I start it using docker start instead of docker run. Is this the normal way to do things? I will generally use docker run the first time and docker start every other time?
Persistance: I created a database and populated it on the running container. I did this using pgadmin3 to connect. I can stop and start the container and the data is persisted, although I'm not sure why or how is this happening. I can see in the Dockerfile of the official postgres image that a volume is created (VOLUME /var/lib/postgresql/data), but I'm not sure that's the reason persistance is working. Could you please briefly explain (or point to an explanation) about how this all works?
Architecture: from what I read, it seems that the most appropriate architecture for this kind of app would be to run 3 separate containers. One for the database, one for persisting the database data, and one for the node app. Is this a good way to do it? How does using a data container improve things? AFAIK my current setup is working ok without one.
Is there anything else I should pay atention to?
Thanks
EDIT: adding to my confusion, I just ran a new container from the debian official image (no Dockerfile, just docker run -i -t -d --name debtest debian /bin/bash). With the container running in the background, I attached to it using docker attach debtest and the proceeded to apt-get install postgresql. Once installed I ran (still from within the container) psql and created a table in the default postgres database, and populated it with 1 record. Then I exited the shell and the container stopped automatically since the shell wasn't running anymore. I started the container againg using docker start debtest, then attached to it and finally run psql again. I found everything is persisted since the first run. Postgresql is installed, my table is there, and offcourse the record I inserted is there too. I'm really confused as to why do I need a VOLUME to persist data, since this quick test didn't use one and everything apears to work just fine. Am I missing something here?
Thanks again
1.
docker run --name some-postgres -e POSTGRES_PASSWORD=mysecretpassword
-d postgres
After I stop the container I cannot run it again using the above
command, because the container already exists.
Correct. You named it (--name some-postgres) hence before starting a new one, the old one has to be deleted, e.g. docker rm -f some-postgres
So I start it using
docker start instead of docker run. Is this the normal way to do
things? I will generally use docker run the first time and docker
start every other time?
No, it is by no means normal for docker. Docker process containers are supposed normally to be ephemeral, that is easily thrown away and started anew.
Persistance: ... I can stop and start
the container and the data is persisted, although I'm not sure why or
how is this happening. ...
That's because you are reusing the same container. Remove the container and the data is gone.
Architecture: from what I read, it seems that the most appropriate
architecture for this kind of app would be to run 3 separate
containers. One for the database, one for persisting the database
data, and one for the node app. Is this a good way to do it? How does
using a data container improve things? AFAIK my current setup is
working ok without one.
Yes, this is the good way to go by having separate containers for separate concerns. This comes in handy in many cases, say when for example you need to upgrade the postgres base image without losing your data (that's in particular where the data container starts to play its role).
Is there anything else I should pay atention to?
When acquainted with the docker basics, you may take a look at Docker compose or similar tools that will help you to run multicontainer applications easier.
Short and simple:
What you get from the official postgres image is a ready-to-go postgres installation along with some gimmicks which can be configured through environment variables. With docker run you create a container. The container lifecycle commands are docker start/stop/restart/rm Yes, this is the Docker way of things.
Everything inside a volume is persisted. Every container can have an arbitrary number of volumes. Volumes are directories either defined inside the Dockerfile, the parent Dockerfile or via the command docker run ... -v /yourdirectoryA -v /yourdirectoryB .... Everything outside volumes is lost with docker rm. Everything including volumes is lost with docker rm -v
It's easier to show than to explain. See this readme with Docker commands on Github, read how I use the official PostgreSQL image for Jira and also add NGINX to the mix: Jira with Docker PostgreSQL. Also a data container is a cheap trick to being able to remove, rebuild and renew the container without having to move the persisted data.
Congratulations, you have managed to grasp the basics! Keep it on! Try docker-compose to better manage those nasty docker run ...-commands and being able to manage multi-containers and data-containers.
Note: You need a blocking thread in order to keep a container running! Either this command must be explicitly set inside the Dockerfile, see CMD, or given at the end of the docker run -d ... /usr/bin/myexamplecommand command. If your command is NON blocking, e.g. /bin/bash, then the container will always stop immediately after executing the command.
My question aims at verifying and maybe rectifying my idea of the reliability of Docker containers. I read both, the Docker documentation and several articles on VOLUME in the Dockerfile and --v as an argument when running a container as means to persist data outside a Docker container. Be it in a data container or on the host system. As would like to keep the complexity of my setup simple, I would prefer not to copy/save/store data round and about but keep it in the Docker container itself.
There are several cases through which I discovered the behaviour of Docker containers. I'd like to know if I missed a scenario where a container can be 100% lost unpurposely, i.e. NOT doing $ docker rm -f mycontainer
docker commands to pause, stop and kill a container
-> restartable by $ docker restart mycontainer or $ docker run mycontainer
Host system reboot
-> docker container exits with 0 or 255
Host system unexpected power off
-> What happens?
Application exception
-> docker container exits with -1
Updating or restarting docker (as pointed out by Greg)
-> expected behavior: like on system reboot (?)
In all those cases, the docker container is still existent in the end. So is there any other scenario that can cause a docker container to be lost like with $ docker rm -f mycontainer?
The background is, that I read a lot about mounted volumes and external datastorage on the host system for Postgres but I'd like to avoid storing data outside my containers on the host system if possible. On the other hand, I don't want to wake up and have all data lost. (I do perform regular SQL-dumps, but I don't want to do this every 5 minutes). If a docker container itself is not reliable for persistant data, I don't see why I should create a second container to hold the data for a first one and increase the complexity of my system by adding a new container but not gaining anything in terms of reliability.
Edit: There are two points in the Docker userguide on Volumes which do not explicitly explain which behaviour to expect and therefore making me question if these concepts provide extra reliability:
Changes to a data volume will not be included when you update an
image
-> Does that mean that they get lost or that the content of the volume won't be changed?
Volumes persist until no containers use them
-> What's the definition of 'use'? As long as a container is not stopped, killed, removed? Does that mean that the volume Docker created on the host system will get removed? Or does volume only refer to a virtual bridge between a directory inside Docker and one on the host system?
If you store all your data in the container, what are you going to do when you need to update the image? Updates to images are normally done by changing the Dockerfile and rebuilding the image. If my data is kept separate to my container, I can start a new version of the image, mount the data with --volumes-from or -v and kill the old container. In your case, you have to keep the container running and try to patch in place with something like puppet.
Also, I'm not sure what you think you're saving. If you run the official postgres image, it will have declared volumes in the Dockerfile. Those volumes exist as normal directories on your host system whether you ran the container with -v or not. Even if your Dockerfile has no volumes, clearly the UFS is being stored on your host anyway.
In general, you should consider containers to be temporary and stateless. Whilst you don't have to do this, you will find most of the tooling and support services are designed around this idiom.
Regarding your scenarios, there are a few you're missing:
A bug could make it impossible to restart a stopped container
The updating issue mentioned above
If you want to change storage driver. This will cause a great deal of problems, as you need to migrate your images.
Just for clarity on the commands, docker start will restart stopped or exited containers and docker unpause will unpause paused containers.