Storage for Docker - what are people using?

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,511
5,792
113
Docker seems a bit like it is still in the wild west. Seems stable enough if you are running 1 container for production, but also seems like if you want to actually have production clusters there is always some "gotcha" coming up.

What are people using these days to have persistent services? Flocker +? Machine + Swarm + ? Just using GlusterFS as storage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Minus

dataoscar

Member
Dec 2, 2013
68
10
8
All my containers are stored in nfs. It's flexible enough that I can run the container from any computer or vm I desire.

Currently I don't use a data container, but since looking at flocker I may start to make things easier.
 

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,511
5,792
113
All my containers are stored in nfs. It's flexible enough that I can run the container from any computer or vm I desire.

Currently I don't use a data container, but since looking at flocker I may start to make things easier.
Then there is the question of whether you do clustered storage or local ZFS storage.

TBH - my biggest worry is putting STH on something like that then having the project die/ change the API so much that I need to re-do.
 

PigLover

Moderator
Jan 26, 2011
3,184
1,545
113
ZoL is stable and not likely to die.

For clustering, both GlusterFS and Ceph are both highly stable and in use by large enterprises (twitter, netflix, etc.). Both projects have undergone significant release updates and shown both backward and forward compatibility.

I'd say if you stay mainstream (ZoL, Gluster, Ceph, etc) you are very safe for many years.
 

PigLover

Moderator
Jan 26, 2011
3,184
1,545
113
As far as project stability I'd actually be more worried about Docker itself. They are raw, untested and not yet in play with any major user. They've managed to tick off other major ecosystem partners (CoreOS among others) who are now backing competing projects for container management. My read is that Docker has largely lost their 'buzz'.
 

Patrick

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 21, 2010
12,511
5,792
113
As far as project stability I'd actually be more worried about Docker itself. They are raw, untested and not yet in play with any major user. They've managed to tick off other major ecosystem partners (CoreOS among others) who are now backing competing projects for container management. My read is that Docker has largely lost their 'buzz'.
I think they got the container bit OK but then it is taking too long to scale to something (storage + networking + orchestration) that would really let you do clustered configs. I mean even machine + swarm they have big not ready disclaimers on.

I like CoreOS but need Ubuntu support :-/
 

PigLover

Moderator
Jan 26, 2011
3,184
1,545
113
The entire Container management space is still too raw to call a winner. It is an interesting space for the right kind of apps, but very early days here.
 

Prasanth K M

New Member
Sep 28, 2016
3
0
1
37
All my containers are stored in nfs. It's flexible enough that I can run the container from any computer or vm I desire.

Currently I don't use a data container, but since looking at flocker I may start to make things easier.

Hi,

Can we use flocker in local machine for testing purpose?
 

Marsh

Moderator
May 12, 2013
2,644
1,496
113
Background info for my lab.
I use Ranch for docker management , Rancher cluster using on 4 x Ubutnu VMs , the 4 Ubuntu VMs runs on Proxmox 6 nodes Cepth cluster.

My next fun project is to try out.
Setting Up Shared Volumes with Convoy-NFS | Rancher Labs
GitHub - rancher/convoy: A Docker volume plugin, managing persistent container volumes.

If you are using AWS, Rancher Convoy has a plugin with AWS EFS.

Rancher used to have a project Convoy plugin with Cepth, but it was not production ready, so they pulled Convoy with Cepth .