this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2024
46 points (81.9% liked)

Selfhosted

40702 readers
429 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
 

Hello! πŸ˜€
I want to share my thoughts on docker and maybe discuss about it!
Since some months I started my homelab and as any good "homelabing guy" I absolutely loved using docker. Simple to deploy and everything. Sadly these days my mind is changing... I recently switch to lxc containers to make easier backup and the xperience is pretty great, the only downside is that not every software is available natively outside of docker πŸ™ƒ
But I switch to have more control too as docker can be difficult to set up some stuff that the devs don't really planned to.
So here's my thoughts and slowly I'm going to leave docker for more old-school way of hosting services. Don't get me wrong docker is awesome in some use cases, the main are that is really portable and simple to deploy no hundreds dependencies, etc. And by this I think I really found how docker could be useful, not for every single homelabing setup, and it's not my case.

Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I let you talk about it in the comments, thx.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] beerclue@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago

I'm actually doing the opposite :)

I've been using vms, lxc containers and docker for years. In the last 3 years or so, I've slowly moved to just docker containers. I still have a few vms, of course, but they only run docker :)

Containers are a breeze to update, there is no dependency hell, no separate vms for each app...

More recently, I've been trying out kubernetes. Mostly to learn and experiment, since I use it at work.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 30 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's hard for me to tell if I'm just set in my ways according to the way I used to do it, but I feel exactly the same.

I think Docker started as "we're doing things at massive scale, and we need to have a way to spin up new installations automatically and reliably." That was good.

It's now become "if I automate the installation of my software, it doesn't matter that the whole thing is a teetering mess of dependencies and scripted hacks, because it'll all be hidden inside the container, and also people with no real understanding can just push the button and deploy it."

I forced myself to learn how to use Docker for installing a few things, found it incredibly hard to do anything of consequence to the software inside the container, and for my use case it added extra complexity for no reason, and I mostly abandoned it.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I hate how docker made it so that a lot of projects only have docker as the official way to install the software.

This is my tinfoil opinion, but to me, docker seems to enable the "phone-ification" ( for a lack of better term) of softwares. The upside is that it is more accessible to spin services on a home server. The downside is that we are losing the knowledge of how the different parts of the software work together.

I really like the Turnkey Linux projects. It's like the best of both worlds. You deploy a container and a script setups the container for you, but after that, you have the full control over the software like when you install the binaries

[–] Strit@lemmy.linuxuserspace.show 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I hate how docker made it so that a lot of projects only have docker as the official way to install the software.

Just so we are clear on this. This is not dockers fault. The projects chose Docker as a distribution method, most likely because it's as widespread and known as it is. It's simply just to reach more users without spreading too thin.

[–] Croquette@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 week ago

You are right and I should have been more precise.

I understand why docker was created and became popular because it abstracts a lot of the setup and make deployment a lot easier.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mesamunefire@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Honestly after using docker and containerization for more than a decade, my home setups are just yunohost or baremetal (a small pi) with some periodic backups. I care more about my own time now than my home setup and I want things to just be stable. Its been good for a couple of years now, without anything other than some quick updates. You dont have to deal with infa changes with updates, you dont have to deal with slowdowns, everything works pretty well.

At work its different Docker, Kubernetes, etc... are awesome because they can deal gracefully with dependencies, multiple deploys per day, large infa. But ill be the first to admit that takes a bit more manpower and monitoring systems that are much better than a small home setup.

[–] WeAreAllOne@lemm.ee 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I tend to also agree with your opinion,but lately Yunohost have quite few broken apps, they're not very fast on updates and also not many active developers. Hats off to them though because they're doing the best they can !

[–] mesamunefire@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I have to agree, the community seems to come and go. Some apps have daily updates and some have been updated only once. If I were to start a new server, I would probably still pick yunohost, but remove some of the older apps as one offs. The lemmy one for example is stuck on a VERY old version. However the GotoSocial app is updated every time there is an update in the main repo.

Still super good support for something that is free and open source. Stable too :) but sometimes stability means old.

[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Didn't really tried YunoHost it's basically a simple selfhostable cloud server?

[–] mesamunefire@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Basically. It's just Ubuntu server with some really good niceties.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (4 children)

yeah I think that at the end even if it seems a bit "retro" the "normal install" with periodic backups/updates on default vm (or even lxc containers) are the best to use, the most stable and configurable

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Are you using docker-compose and local bind mounts? I'd not, you're making backing up uch harder than it needs to be. Its certainly easier than backing up LXCs and a whole lot easier to restore.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CameronDev@programming.dev 9 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Are you using docker compose scripts? Backup should be easy, you have your compose scripts to configure the containers, then the scripts can easily be commited somewhere or backed up.

Data should be volume mounted into the container, and then the host disk can be backed up.

The only app that I've had to fight docker on is Seafile, and even that works quite well now.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] InnerScientist@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I use podman using home-manager configs, I could run the services natively but currently I have a user for each service that runs the podman containers. This way each service is securely isolated from each other and the rest of the system. Maybe if/when NixOS supports good selinux rules I'll switch back to running it native.

[–] agile_squirrel@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This sounds great! I'd love to see your config. I'm not using home manager, but have 1 non root user for all podman containers. 1 user per service seems like a great setup.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] markc@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Docker is a convoluted mess of overlays and truly weird network settings. I found that I have no interest in application containers and would much prefer to set up multiple services in a system container (or VM) as if it was a bare-metal server. I deploy a small Proxmox cluster with Proxmox Backup Server in a CT on each node and often use scripts from https://community-scripts.github.io/ProxmoxVE/. Everything is automatically backed up (and remote sync'd twice) with a deduplication factor of 10. A Dockerless Homelab FTW!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sibbo@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I can recommend NixOS. It's quite simple if your wanted application is part of NixOS already. Otherwise it requires quite some knowledge to get it to work anyways.

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yeah, It's either 4 lines and you got some service running... Or you need to learn a functional language, fight the software project and make it behave on an immutable filesystem and google 2 pages of boilerplate code to package it... I rarely had anything in-between. πŸ˜†

[–] InnerScientist@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Hey now, you can also spend 20 pages of documentation and 10 pages of blogs/forums/github^1^ and you can implement a whole nix module such that you only need to write a further 3 lines to activate the service.

1 Your brain can have a little source code, as a threat.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And I've done the exact opposite moves everything off of lxc to docker containers. So much easier and nicer less machines to maintain.

[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Less "machines" but you need to maintain docker containers at the end

[–] gaylord_fartmaster@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Just run docker in an LXC. That's what I do when I have to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] huskypenguin@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (9 children)

I love docker, and backups are a breeze if you're using ZFS or BTRFS with volume sending. That is the bummer about docker, it relies on you to back it up instead of having its native backup system.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] SpazOut@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

For me the power of docker is its inherent immutability. I want to be able to move a service around without having to manual tinker, install packages and change permissions etc. It’s repeatable and reliable. However, to get to the point of understanding enough about it to do this reliably can be a huge investment of time. As a daily user of docker (and k8s) I would use it everyday over a VM. I’ve lost count of the number of VMs I’ve setup following installation guidelines, and missed a single step - so machines that should be identical aren’t. I do however understand the frustration with it when you first start, but IMO stick with it as the benefits are huge.

[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Yeah docker is great for this and it's really a pleasure to deploy apps so quickly but the problems comes later, if you want to really customize the service to you, you can't instead of doing your own image...

[–] SpazOut@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago

In most cases you can get away with over mounting configuration files within the container. In extreme cases you can build your own image - but the steps for that are just the changes you would have applied manually on a VM. At least that image is repeatable and you can bring it up somewhere else without having to manually apply all those changes in a panic.

[–] Neptr@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Docker is good when combined with gVisor runtime for better isolation.

What is gVisor?gVisor is an application kernel, written in memory safe Golang, that emulates most system calls and massively reduces the attack surface of the kernel. This is important since the host and guest share the same kernel, and Docker runs rootful. Root inside a Docker container is the same as root on the host, as long as a sandbox escape is used. This could arise if a container image requires unsafe permissions like Docker socket access. gVisor protects against privilege escalation by only using root at the start and never handing root over to the guest.

Sydbox OCI runtime is also cool and faster than gVisor (both are quick)

[–] MNByChoice@midwest.social 2 points 1 week ago

I like reminding people that with every new technology, the old one is still around. The new gets most of the attention, but the old is still kicking. (We still have wire wrapped programs kicking around.)

You are all good. Spend your limited attention on other things.

[–] Decq@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've never really like the convoluted docker tooling. And I've been hit a few times with a docker image uodates just breaking everything (looking at you nginx reverse proxy manager...). Now I've converted everything to nixos services/containers. And i couldn't be happier with the ease of configuration and control. Backup is just.a matter of pushing my flake to github and I'm done.

[–] foremanguy92_@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 days ago

Already said but I need to try NixOS one day, this thing seems to worth it

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί