118

For the vast majority of docker images, the documentation only mention a super long and hard to understand "docker run" one liner.

Why nobody is placing an example docker-compose.yml in their documentation? It's so tidy and easy to understand, also much easier to run in the future, just set and forget.

If every image had an yml to just copy, I could get it running in a few seconds, instead I have to decode the line to become an yml

I want to know if it's just me that I'm out of touch and should use "docker run" or it's just that an "one liner" looks much tidier in the docs. Like to say "hey just copy and paste this line to run the container. You don't understand what it does? Who cares"

The worst are the ones that are piping directly from curl to "sudo bash"...

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] OmltCat@lemmy.world 76 points 1 year ago

Because it’s “quick start”. Least effort to get a taste of it. For actual deployment I would use compose as well.

Many project also have a example docker-compose.yml in the repository if you dig not so deep into it

There is https://www.composerize.com to convert run command to compose. Works ~80% of the time.

I honestly don’t understand why anyone would make “curl and bash” the officially installation method these days, with docker around. Unless this is the ONLY thing you install on the system, so many things can go wrong.

[-] Shrek@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

I used to host composerize. Now I host it-tools which has its own version and many other super helpful tools!

[-] Heastes@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I was going to mention it-tools. It's great!
And if you need more stuff in a similar vein, cyberchef is also pretty neat.

[-] Shrek@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Nice! I wonder if there's anything one has that the other doesn't.

[-] beaumains@programming.dev 4 points 1 year ago

You have changed my life today.

[-] Shrek@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

No, the creator of it-tools did. I just told you about it. Give them a star on GitHub and maybe donate if you can ❤️

[-] anonymoose@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

Out of curiosity, is there much overhead to using docker than installing via curl and bash? I'm guessing there's some redundant layers that docker uses?

[-] Shrek@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Of course, but the amount of overhead completely depends per container. The reason I am willing to accept the -in my experience- very small amount of overhead I typically get is that the repeatability is amazing with docker.

My first server was unRAID (freebsd, not Linux), I setup proxmox (debian with a webui) later. I took my unRAID server down for maintenance but wanted a certain service to stay up. So I copied a backup from unRAID to another server and had the service running in minutes. If it was a package, there is no guarantee that it would have been built for both OSes, both builds were the same version, or they used the same libraries.

My favorite way to extend the above is Docker Compose. I create a folder with a docker-compose.yml file and I can keep EVERYTHING for that service in a single folder. unRAID doesn't use Docker Compose in its webui. So, I try to stick to keeping things in Proxmox for ease of transfer and stuff.

[-] anonymoose@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Makes sense! I have a bunch of services (plex, radarr, sonarr, gluetun, etc) on my media server on Armbian running as docker containers. The ease of management is just something else! My HC2 doesn't seem to break a sweat running about a dozen containers, so the overhead can't be too bad.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] d4nm3d@demmy.co.uk 37 points 1 year ago

you don't have to decode anything.. just throw it in here :

https://www.composerize.com

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ilmagico@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

I don't think you're out of touch, just use docker compose. It's not that hard to conver the docker run example command line into a neat docker-compose.yml, if they don't already provide one for you. So much better than just running containers manually.

Also, you should always understand what any command or docker compose file does before you run it! And don't blindly curl | bash either, download the bash script and look at it first.

[-] platysalty@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

Nah I'll just copy paste half the tutorial in one go and then blame others when things break

[-] radiated@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Average linux user /s

[-] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 9 points 1 year ago

Plain docker is useful when running some simple containers, or even one-off things. A lot of people thing about containers as long running services, but there's also many containers that are for running essentially a single command to completion and then shuts down.

There's also alternate ways to handle containers, for example Podman is typically used with systemd services as unlike Docker it doesn't work through a persistent daemon, so the configuration goes to a service.

I typically skip the docker-compose for simple containers, and turn to compose for either containers with loads of arguments or multi-container things.

Also switching between Docker and Podman depending on the machine and needs.

[-] AlexKalopsia@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

I used docker run when I first started, I think it's a fairly easy entry point that "just works".

However I would never really go back to it, since compose is a lot tighter and offers a better sense of overview and control

[-] Toribor@corndog.uk 8 points 1 year ago

I've started replacing my docker compose files with pure ansible that is the equivilent of doing docker run. My ansible playbooks look almost exactly like my compose file but they can also create folders, set config files or cycle services when configs are updated.

It's been a bit of a learning process but it's replaced a lot what was previously documentation with code instead.

[-] CaptainHowdy@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

Check out the GitHub project ansible-nas

[-] Toribor@corndog.uk 2 points 1 year ago

ansible-nas

Wow, yeah this is exactly the sort of roles/playbooks that I've been building. I'm definitely using this as a source before starting my own from scratch. Thanks for sharing.

[-] xcjs@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

I've done something similar, but I'm using compose files orchestrated by Ansible instead.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Knusper@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago

Personally, I do usually want the docker run command. Much easier to use when orchestrating the deployment with other tools.

For readability, I just line-break the command after each argument...

[-] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

I too am endlessly frustrated by documentation that lacks compose file examples.

Fortunately, this exists: Docker Compose Generator

[-] krolden@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Ive almost completely moved to podman managed by systemd and I highly recommend it.

[-] dandroid@dandroid.app 3 points 1 year ago

I do this out of habit because this is how my work does it, but I honestly don't know the benefits of doing it this way. Can you explain (or provide a link?)

[-] CaptainHowdy@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I prefer to use ansible to define and provision my containers (docker/podman over containerd). For work, of course k8s and helm takes the cake. no reason to run k8s for personal self hosting, though.

[-] cliffhanger407@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

No reason aside from building endless unnecessary complexity, which--let's be honest--is 90% of the point of running a home lab.

Shit's broken at work: hate it. Shit's broken at home: ooh a project!

[-] Pixel@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago

Honestly I never really saw the point of it, just seems like another dependency. The compose file and the docket run commands have almost the same info. I'd rather jump to kubectl and skip compose entirely. I'd like to see a tool that can convert between these 3 formats for you. As for piping into bash, no - I'd only do it on a very trusted package.

[-] SilentMobius@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Docker-compose is a orchestration tool that wraps around the inbuilt docker functions that are exposed like "docker run", when teaching people a tool you generally explain the base functions of the tool and then explain wrappers around that tool in terms of the functions you've already learned.

Similarly when you have a standalone container you generally provide the information to get the container running in terms of base docker, not an orchestration tool... unless the container must be used alongside other containers, then orchestration config is often provided.

[-] lonlazarus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

I’m curious to hear from the runners. I use compose and I feel the same, it’s more readable and editable and it allows me to backup the command by backing up the docker-compose.yml

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] morethanevil@lmy.mymte.de 3 points 1 year ago

I always use docker-compose. It is very handy if you ever want to have a good backup or move the whole server to another. Copy over files -> docker compose up -d and you are done For beginners, they should use docker compose from the start. Easier than docker run

If you ever want to convert those one-liner to a proper .yml then use this converter

[-] casrou@feddit.dk 2 points 1 year ago

That is one docker compose up -d for each file you copied over, right.. Or are you doing something even smarter?

[-] morethanevil@lmy.mymte.de 3 points 1 year ago

I have one docker-compose.yml for each service. You can use docker compose -f /path/to/docker-compose.yml up -d in scripts

I would never use "one big" file for all. You only get various problems imo

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

You use a separate file for each service? Why? I use one file for each stack, and if anything, breaking them out would give me issues.

[-] morethanevil@lmy.mymte.de 2 points 1 year ago

I meant stack 😸

My structure is like

/docker/immich/docker-compose /docker/synapse/docker...

But I read that some people make one big file for everything

[-] prenatal_confusion@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

I have all services in one compose file. Up -d starts them all. Servicename up -d is more selective.

[-] yaaaaayPancakes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

First version of my server, I wrote a bunch of custom shell scripts to execute docker run statements to launch all my containers b/c I didn't know docker at all and didn't want to learn compose.

Current version of my server, I use docker compose. But all the containers I use come from linuxserver.io, and they always give examples for both. I use ansible to deploy everything.

[-] jalim@jalim.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Something that always confused me was how docker doesn’t come with compose installed as a core component.

[-] shnizmuffin@lemmy.inbutts.lol 5 points 1 year ago

It does now.

[-] radiated@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

docker compose vs docker-compose. Yes I know it’s stupid.

[-] jalim@jalim.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Well today I learned something! I’ve been using docker-compose for 5+ years now and I never happened upon the addition of compose to docker haha.

It’s also the issue with the internet and all the fantastic guides which even if they were written 12 months ago, are already out of date!

[-] hoodlem@hoodlem.me 2 points 1 year ago

Totally agree. I need to then pick apart the run command to make the docker compose file, then get something wrong and need to do a search.

[-] TitanLaGrange@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Previously my server was just a Debian box where I had a 'docker' directory with a bunch of .sh files containing 'docker run' commands (and a couple of docker-compose files for services that that have closely related containers). That works really well, it's easy to understand and manage. I had nginx running natively to expose stuff as necessary.

Recently I decided to try TrueNAS Scale (I wanted more reliable storage for my media library, which is large enough to be annoying to replace when a simple drive fails), and I'm still trying to figure it out. It's kind of a pain in the ass for running containers since the documentation is garbage. The web interface is kind of nice (other than constantly logging me out), but the learning curve for charts and exposing services has been tough, and it seems that ZFS is just a bad choice for Docker.

I was attracted to the idea of being able to run my services on my NAS server as one appliance, but it's feeling like TrueNAS Scale is way too complicated for home-scale (and way too primitive for commercial, not entirely sure what market they are aiming for) and I'm considering dumping it and setting up two servers, one for NAS and for running my containers and VMs.

[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

it turns out GPT converts plain docker commands into docker compose files well enough to me, it's been my go-to when I need to create a compose YAML. Checking a YAML and making one or two small corrections is even faster than entering all info in a form like Docker Compose Generator.

[-] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Even for the one-liner argument - a better one liner than any docker run is docker compose up [-d].

[-] giacomo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'm sure someone has written a script to convert docker run commands to compose files.

I am usually customizing variables and tend to use compose for anything I am planning on running in "production". I'll use run if it's a temporary or on-demand use container.

It's not really that much effort to write a compose file with the variables from a run command, but you do have to keep an eye on formatting.

[-] ghulican@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

composerize.com

It’s saved me countless minutes.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2023
118 points (92.8% liked)

Selfhosted

40406 readers
406 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS