I have a service that generates a picture. Once it's ready, the user will be able to download it.
What is the recommended way to share a storage volume between a worker pod and a backend service?
In general the recommended way is "don't". While a few volume providers support multi-mounting, it's very hard to do that in a way that isn't sadmaking. Preferably use an external services like AWS S3 for hosting the actual file content and store references in your existing database(s). If you need a local equivalent, check out Minio for simple cases.
Personally i will not recommended it to do. better then that you two container side one pod if having dependency on each other. so if one pod goes fail that file manager also delete and create at particular time if needed
Related
I am using Docker desktop to run a application in kubernetes platform where i need location to store files how can i use my local directory(c:\app-data) to be pointed to application running in kubernetes.
I had a similar problem. Docker contains are usually meant to be throwaway/gateway containers normally, so people don't usually use them for storing files.
That being said, you have two options:
Add path and files to docker container, which will cause your docker container to be massive in size (NOT RECOMMENDED). Docker build will require substantial time and memory, as all the files will be copied. Here's an example of creating a local ubuntu container with docker. https://thenewstack.io/docker-basics-how-to-share-data-between-a-docker-container-and-host/
Host your files through another server/api, and fetch those files using simple requests in your app. I used this solution. The only caveat is you need
to be able to host your files somehow. This is easy enough, but may require extra payment. https://www.techradar.com/best/file-hosting-and-sharing-services
You can't really do this. The right approach depends on what the data you're trying to store is.
If you're just trying to store data somewhere – perhaps it's the backing data for a MySQL StatefulSet – you can create a PersistentVolumeClaim like normal. Minikube includes a minimal volume provisioner so you should automatically get a PersistentVolume created; you don't need to do any special setup for this. But, the PersistentVolume will live within the minikube container/VM; if you completely delete the minikube setup, it could delete that data, and you won't be able to directly access the data from the host.
If you have a data set on the host that your container needs to access, there are a couple of ways to do it. Keep in mind that, in a "real" Kubernetes cluster, you won't be able to access your local filesystem at all. Creating a PersistentVolume as above and then running a pod to copy the data into it could be one approach; as #ParmandeepChaddha suggests in their answer, baking the data into the image is another reasonable approach (this can be very reasonable if the data is only a couple of megabytes).
If the data is the input or output data to your process, you can also consider restructuring your application so that it transfers that data over a protocol like HTTP. Set up a NodePort Service in front of your application, and use a tool like curl to HTTP POST the data into the service.
Finally, you could be considering a setup where all of the important data is local: you have some batch files on the local system, the job's purpose is to convert some local files to other local files, and it's just that the program is in minikube. (Or, similarly, you're trying to develop your application and the source files are on your local system.) In this case Kubernetes, as a distributed, clustered container system, isn't the right tool. Running the application directly on your system is the best approach; you can simulate this with a docker run -v bind mount, but this is inconvenient and can lead to permission and environment problems.
(In theory you can use a hostPath volume too, and minikube has some support to mount a host directory into the VM. In practice, the setup required to do this is as complex as the rest of your Kubernetes setup combined, and it won't be portable to any other Kubernetes installation. I wouldn't attempt this.)
You can mount your local directory to your kubernetes Pod using hostPath. Your path c:\app-data on your Windows host should be represented as either /C/app-data or /host_mnt/c/app-data, depending on your Docker Desktop version as suggested in this comment.
You may also want to take a look at this answer.
I've a requirement to update a value in all the running containers in GKE. We have designed the Restful web service which will update the some property values at run time but that values should be updated in all the running instance. I want to know how can in send the request to all the containers. We are currently using GKE(Google Kubernetes Engine) and Ingress Load balancer. I've been searching for a solution but couldn't figure out solution.
You can use configmap or kubernetes secrets do the same
I am not sure about your use case but certainly, this isn't a good practice and never recommended. A container shouldn't be changed during their life span.
For similar kind of use case, Kubernetes (K8S) offers a config map which stores the values which can be modified and shared by containers.
But as you've written REST, I guess that you want to modify values through some kind of REST service call and want those values to be available to all containers. By the other hand, you can move those values to persistence storage like DB and with a single call change values at storage and let all container read from that storage so that feature container can also have access to those updated values.
Hope this helps!
I have a fully functioning Kubernetes cluster with one master and one worker, running on CoreOS.
Everything is working and my pods and services are running fine. Now I have no clue how to proceed in a webserver idea.
Before I go further: I have no configs at the moment about my idea I am going to explain. I just did a lot of research.
When setting up a pod (nginx) with a service. You get the default nginx page. After that you can setup a mount volume with a hostvolume (volume mapping from host to container).
But lets say I want to seperate every site (multiple sites separated with different pods), how can I let my users add files to their pod/nginx document root? Having FTP in the CoreOS node removes the Kubernetes way and adds security vulnerabilities.
If someone can help me shed some light on this issue, that would be great.
Thanks for your time.
I'm assuming that you want to have multiple nginx servers running. The content of each nginx server is managed by a different admin (you called them users).
TL;DR:
Option 1: Each admin needs to build their own nginx docker image every time the static files change and deploy that new image. This is if you consider these static files as a part of the source-code of the nginx application
Option 2: Use a persistent volume for nginx, the init-script for the nginx image should use something like s3 to sync all its files with s3 and then start nginx
Before you proceed with building an application with kubernetes. The most important thing is to separate your services into 2 conceptual categories, and give up your desire to touch the underlying nodes directly:
1) Stateless: These are services that are built by the developers and can be released. They can be stopped, started, moved from one node to another, their filesystem can be reset during restart and they will work perfectly fine. Majority of your web-services will fit this category.
2) Stateful: These services cannot be stopped and restarted willy nilly like the ones above. Primarily, their underlying filesystem must be persistent and remain the same across runs of the service. Databases, file-servers and similar services are in this category. These need special care and should use k8s persistent-volumes and now stateful-sets.
Typical application:
nginx: build the nginx.conf into the docker image, and deploy it as a stateless service
rails/nodejs/python service: build the source code into the docker image, configure with env-vars, deploy as a stateless service
database: mount a persistent volume, configure with env-vars, deploy as a stateful service.
Separate sites:
Typically, I think at a k8s deployment and a k8s service level. Each site can be one k8s deployment and k8s service set. You can then have separate ways to expose them (different external DNS/IPs)
Application users storing files:
This is firmly in the category of a stateful service. Use a persistent volume to mount to a /media kind of directory
Developers changing files:
Say developers or admins want to use FTP to change the files that nginx serves. The correct pattern is to build a docker image with the new files and then use that docker image. If there are too many files, and you don't consider those files to be a part of the 'source' of the nginx, then use something like s3 and a persistent volume. In your docker image init script, don't directly start nginx. Contact s3, sync all your files onto your persistent volume, then start nginx.
While the options and reasoning listed by iamnat are right, there's at least one more option to add to the list. You could consider using ConfigMap objects, maintain your file within the configmap and mount them to your containers.
A good example can be found in the official documentation - check the Real World Example configuring Redis section to get some actionable input.
I'm trying to run an api (based on Symfony) with kubernetes thanks to Google Container Engine (GKE).
This API also allow user to store and download files, which are supposed to be saved somewhere.
I tried to run it with 1 replica, and noticed a downtime of the service during the creation of the new container. It looks like at least 2 replicas are needed to avoid downtime.
Taking that into consideration, I'm interested about these options :
A volume based on Google Persistent Disk. Would this mean that all my replicas would be on the same node ? (ReadWriteOnce access mode). If so, in case of a node failure, my service would not be available.
A volume based on Flocker (Backend Persistent Disk). What is the recommended way to install it on GKE ?
Is there another interesting option ? What would you recommend ?
Using GCS (like tex mentioned) is probably the simplest solution (and will be very fast from a GKE cluster). Here is an answer that may help.
If you have a specific need for local persistent storage, you can use Google Persistent Disks, but they can only be mounted as writable in one place.
Petsets (currently alpha) will provide better support for distributed persistent in-cluster storage, so you can also look into that if GCS doesn't work for you.
Background
I have a Java-Servlet application that runs in tomcat, which runs in a docker container, which runs on the Google Container Engine. It is no big deal to extend the docker image so that it also fetches and refreshes the certificates (there is only a single pod per domain, so no inter-pod-communication is required). However certbot needs to save it's credentials and certificates somewhere and the pod's filesystem seems like a bad idea because it is ephemeral and won't survive a pod restart. According to the table with storage options. Google Cloud storage seems like a good idea, because it is very cheap, the volume is auto sized and I can also access it from multiple locations (I don't need to create one disk for each individual pod which will be pretty much empty) including the web-UI (the later may be useful for debugging) and throuput and latency are really no issue for this usecase.
Question
I created a bucket and now I want to access that bucket from a container. Google describes here and yet again here that I can mount the buckets using FUSE. What they don't mention is that you need to make the container privileged to use FUSE which does not feel quite right for me. Additionally I need to install the whole google cloud SDK and set up authentication (which I am going to store... where?). But actually I don't really need fuse access. Just downloading the config on startup and uploading the config after each refresh would be enough. So something that works similar to SCP would do...
There is gcloud which can access files from command line without the need for FUSE, but it still needs to be initialized somehow with credentials.
Here user326502 mentions
It won't work with zero configuration if the App Engine SDK is installed [..] As long as the container lives on a Google Compute Engine instance you can access any bucket in the same project.
He explains further that I magically don't need any credentials when I just use the library. I guess I could write my own copy application with those libraries, but it feels like the fact that I did not find something like this from anyone on the net makes me feel that I am completely on the wrong track.
So how would one actually access a google cloud storage bucket from within a container (as simple as possible)?
You can use gsutil to copy from the bucket to the local disk when the container starts up.
If you are running in Google Container Engine, gsutil will use the service account of the cluster's nodes (to do this, you'll need to specify the storage-ro scope when you create your cluster).
Alternatively, you can create a new service account, generating a JSON key. In Container Engine, you can store that key as a Kubernetes secret, and then mount the secret in the pod that needs to use it. From that pod, you'd configure gsutil to use the service account by calling gcloud auth activate-service-account--key-file /path/to/my/mounted/secret-key.json