[389-users] Re: How to containerize 389DS using Docker in production systems
On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 12:24 +0100, Alberto García Sola wrote: > It's great knowing you are getting a proper container support. > Reading your message, I've found this docker folder withing the > source that I hadn't seen yet: https://pagure.io/389-ds- > base/blob/master/f/docker , with same examples of how to use it > beyond the demo. Great, I would love to hear your feedback on this. > Thank you for the great explanation regarding the situation. > I'll try to report back any issues we find using Docker from the > current MASTER branch, though there are two (IMHO) big stoppers to > get this into production: > The persistance part (https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49213). It's a bit more subtle I think. You can build the image and it creates a /etc/dirsrv/slapd-localhost. BUT if you want persistance you have to overlap volumes ONTO /etc/dirsrv/slapd-localhost AND /var/lib/disrv/slapd-localhost. The issue then is ns-slapd starts and sees empty folders! So suddenly it won't start. If you can extract a /etc/dirsrv/slapd-localhost *AND* a /var/lib/dirsrv/slapd-localhost into these places and then bind mount them, you will have persistence! It's just not a friendly user experience today, and I want it to be as simple as: docker run -v 389ds:latest And you get persistence without messing about. > The upgrade part, which is an essential part of the containers > philosophy, though not such a big stopper as the previous one. This just needs some polish, but this ticket I kind of forgot about shows we have some mechanisms in place that can provide upgrade support already, so I think it's 90% there: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49447 The other patch provides attribute level "upgrade" support, not just "ensure these entries exists" support. > I guess it would be difficult to say, but do you manage any ETAs? Sorry, I don't have an ETA. There are three major goals for me in the coming weeks: * Finish up work on connection system cleanup * Improve and finish work on our new cli tools (read more here: http:// www.port389.org/docs/389ds/design/dsadm-dsconf.html) * Container support Probably in that order. So I can't give an ETA, but I'll be sure to post updates to 389-users and requests for comment when I have more substantial work complete :) I'm still also thinking about scripting of the server and how to manage this, so I'm thinking about ideas which again I'll post design documents and ask for feedback. Hope that helps, > Alberto. > > El 08/03/2018 a las 4:42, William Brown escribió: > > On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 23:50 +, tda...@email.arizona.edu wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 08:52 +0100, Alberto García Sola wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi there, > > > > > > > > I'm currently working on docker support in 389-ds. > > > > > > William, I'm really glad to hear this. We've been running 389 > > > server > > > in docker in EC2 instances for months now and it works great. We > > > have > > > home grown scripts for automating the DS installation and > > > replication > > > between 2 DS instances, but it would be awesome to use a > > > supported > > > setup instead, so I'd really like to try what you have. Our setup > > > uses mounted EBS volumes that contain all the necessary DS > > > folders so > > > that the EC2s can be blown away and recreated any time we want. > > > > Hope you don't mind, but this is a bit of a brain dump. we have > > some > > open tickets about this. Currently we have LOADS of support here > > for > > containers, like detection of container memory and process limits, > > support for containerised installs in dscreate, and more. > > > > But first I want to describe the general picture and situation. > > > > It would be great to have a temporary demo instance like: > > > > docker run 389ds:1.4.0 > > > > And that *works*. > > > > Now, when you want to really use it in production something more > > like: > > > > docker run -v /etc/dirsrv:/etc/dirsrv -v > > /var/lib/dirsrv:/var/lib/dirsrv 389ds:1.4.0 > > > > And now you have persistance, and can pull, upgrade, destroy, > > everything. > > > > If you want a readonly ephemeral replica, something maybe like: > > > > docker run -e replication_manager=12345 389ds:1.4.0 > > > > Which would trigger the replica ID to become 65535 and set the > > replication manager password (which could now be pushed to from > > another > > instance). > > > > So what are the challenges to these scenarios? > > > > Well, the first scenario "kinda works" today, but you don't get > > persistence, and we have to ship a known password. The barrier here > > is > > that ns-slapd (our server binary) needs assistance from > > dscreate/setup- > > ds.pl to create dse.ldif and it's related instance parts. > > > > So we need to move the *SETUP* logic of DS out of python and INTO > > an > > early runtime part of ns-slapd, to be able to process a .inf + > > envvariables to create dse.ldif on startup if it does not exist. > > > > Thankfully
[389-users] Re: How to containerize 389DS using Docker in production systems
It's great knowing you are getting a proper container support. Reading your message, I've found this docker folder withing the source that I hadn't seen yet: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/blob/master/f/docker , with same examples of how to use it beyond the demo. Thank you for the great explanation regarding the situation. I'll try to report back any issues we find using Docker from the current MASTER branch, though there are two (IMHO) big stoppers to get this into production: * The persistance part (https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49213). * The upgrade part, which is an essential part of the containers philosophy, though not such a big stopper as the previous one. I guess it would be difficult to say, but do you manage any ETAs? Alberto. El 08/03/2018 a las 4:42, William Brown escribió: On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 23:50 +, tda...@email.arizona.edu wrote: On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 08:52 +0100, Alberto García Sola wrote: Hi there, I'm currently working on docker support in 389-ds. William, I'm really glad to hear this. We've been running 389 server in docker in EC2 instances for months now and it works great. We have home grown scripts for automating the DS installation and replication between 2 DS instances, but it would be awesome to use a supported setup instead, so I'd really like to try what you have. Our setup uses mounted EBS volumes that contain all the necessary DS folders so that the EC2s can be blown away and recreated any time we want. Hope you don't mind, but this is a bit of a brain dump. we have some open tickets about this. Currently we have LOADS of support here for containers, like detection of container memory and process limits, support for containerised installs in dscreate, and more. But first I want to describe the general picture and situation. It would be great to have a temporary demo instance like: docker run 389ds:1.4.0 And that *works*. Now, when you want to really use it in production something more like: docker run -v /etc/dirsrv:/etc/dirsrv -v /var/lib/dirsrv:/var/lib/dirsrv 389ds:1.4.0 And now you have persistance, and can pull, upgrade, destroy, everything. If you want a readonly ephemeral replica, something maybe like: docker run -e replication_manager=12345 389ds:1.4.0 Which would trigger the replica ID to become 65535 and set the replication manager password (which could now be pushed to from another instance). So what are the challenges to these scenarios? Well, the first scenario "kinda works" today, but you don't get persistence, and we have to ship a known password. The barrier here is that ns-slapd (our server binary) needs assistance from dscreate/setup- ds.pl to create dse.ldif and it's related instance parts. So we need to move the *SETUP* logic of DS out of python and INTO an early runtime part of ns-slapd, to be able to process a .inf + envvariables to create dse.ldif on startup if it does not exist. Thankfully this also solves the second case with a persistant image, with backed storage. The challenge here is the inplace upgrade. When you do say: docker run -v ... 389ds:1.4.0 docker kill ... docker run -v ... 389ds:1.5.0 Because our current upgrade scripts run in perl at RPM upgrade time, when we launch the 1.5.0 container, it would NOT have the upgraded configuration/plugin/other data that we may need. Thankfully, this is in the process of being fixed via some patches that are currently underreview, so this concern is "mostly" fixed, and the team is pretty aware that upgrade perl scripts aren't a future acceptable thing. Finally, is the stateless instance - again, this requires more interaction at start up to get the replica setup like this, but it also requires us to coordinate docker networking / others for "what IP do we replicate to?". This is a tougher challenge. Today we could solve this externally by just reconfiguring our various instances, but this automation would be nice to achieve. Now there are still other issues - certificates and load balancing is a big one. We have the concept of "SSF" in the server (despite ssf's flaws). We won't let you do password changes or other operations WITHOUT a secure connection, but today that means putting cert and key material INTO the container. So another area we need to improve is load balancer support for haproxy. There is an open ticket for parsing HAproxy metadata for proper log data, but we need to have an "SSF override" value so that DS on plaintext 389 "treats it" like it's a secure connection, and haproxy ONLY advertises 636 (ldaps). Another concern is backups and how to take them effectively, or how to do datarestore correctly. I haven't decided on a good method for this yet (we could have different containers thatj ust use the same volumes and handle it correctly, or we could rely on the online tasks) But william, show me the code!!! Okay, okay. Today, you can build and test our docker container from git master ONLY. We rely on a few too
[389-users] Re: How to containerize 389DS using Docker in production systems
On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 23:50 +, tda...@email.arizona.edu wrote: > > On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 08:52 +0100, Alberto García Sola wrote: > > > > Hi there, > > > > I'm currently working on docker support in 389-ds. > > William, I'm really glad to hear this. We've been running 389 server > in docker in EC2 instances for months now and it works great. We have > home grown scripts for automating the DS installation and replication > between 2 DS instances, but it would be awesome to use a supported > setup instead, so I'd really like to try what you have. Our setup > uses mounted EBS volumes that contain all the necessary DS folders so > that the EC2s can be blown away and recreated any time we want. Hope you don't mind, but this is a bit of a brain dump. we have some open tickets about this. Currently we have LOADS of support here for containers, like detection of container memory and process limits, support for containerised installs in dscreate, and more. But first I want to describe the general picture and situation. It would be great to have a temporary demo instance like: docker run 389ds:1.4.0 And that *works*. Now, when you want to really use it in production something more like: docker run -v /etc/dirsrv:/etc/dirsrv -v /var/lib/dirsrv:/var/lib/dirsrv 389ds:1.4.0 And now you have persistance, and can pull, upgrade, destroy, everything. If you want a readonly ephemeral replica, something maybe like: docker run -e replication_manager=12345 389ds:1.4.0 Which would trigger the replica ID to become 65535 and set the replication manager password (which could now be pushed to from another instance). So what are the challenges to these scenarios? Well, the first scenario "kinda works" today, but you don't get persistence, and we have to ship a known password. The barrier here is that ns-slapd (our server binary) needs assistance from dscreate/setup- ds.pl to create dse.ldif and it's related instance parts. So we need to move the *SETUP* logic of DS out of python and INTO an early runtime part of ns-slapd, to be able to process a .inf + envvariables to create dse.ldif on startup if it does not exist. Thankfully this also solves the second case with a persistant image, with backed storage. The challenge here is the inplace upgrade. When you do say: docker run -v ... 389ds:1.4.0 docker kill ... docker run -v ... 389ds:1.5.0 Because our current upgrade scripts run in perl at RPM upgrade time, when we launch the 1.5.0 container, it would NOT have the upgraded configuration/plugin/other data that we may need. Thankfully, this is in the process of being fixed via some patches that are currently underreview, so this concern is "mostly" fixed, and the team is pretty aware that upgrade perl scripts aren't a future acceptable thing. Finally, is the stateless instance - again, this requires more interaction at start up to get the replica setup like this, but it also requires us to coordinate docker networking / others for "what IP do we replicate to?". This is a tougher challenge. Today we could solve this externally by just reconfiguring our various instances, but this automation would be nice to achieve. Now there are still other issues - certificates and load balancing is a big one. We have the concept of "SSF" in the server (despite ssf's flaws). We won't let you do password changes or other operations WITHOUT a secure connection, but today that means putting cert and key material INTO the container. So another area we need to improve is load balancer support for haproxy. There is an open ticket for parsing HAproxy metadata for proper log data, but we need to have an "SSF override" value so that DS on plaintext 389 "treats it" like it's a secure connection, and haproxy ONLY advertises 636 (ldaps). Another concern is backups and how to take them effectively, or how to do datarestore correctly. I haven't decided on a good method for this yet (we could have different containers thatj ust use the same volumes and handle it correctly, or we could rely on the online tasks) But william, show me the code!!! Okay, okay. Today, you can build and test our docker container from git master ONLY. We rely on a few too many things that are only in 1.4.0 and this is a fast-ish moving target today. I won't promise we have a stable solution for you, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on how we can improve. If you want to test this today: http://www.port389.org/docs/389ds/contributing.html#get-the-code git clone https://pagure.io/389-ds-base.git cd 389-ds-base make -f docker.mk poc This builds a container called "389-poc:latest", which functions like the "demo" instance. We statically create an instance in the container called "localhost" with the dm password of "directory manager password". There is an updated to this poc in pagure in the following ticket: https://pagure.io/389-ds-base/issue/49570 There is still quite a bit of integration work to go, but I'd love some feedback and review of
[389-users] Re: How to containerize 389DS using Docker in production systems
> On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 08:52 +0100, Alberto García Sola wrote: > > Hi there, > > I'm currently working on docker support in 389-ds. William, I'm really glad to hear this. We've been running 389 server in docker in EC2 instances for months now and it works great. We have home grown scripts for automating the DS installation and replication between 2 DS instances, but it would be awesome to use a supported setup instead, so I'd really like to try what you have. Our setup uses mounted EBS volumes that contain all the necessary DS folders so that the EC2s can be blown away and recreated any time we want. ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
[389-users] Re: How to containerize 389DS using Docker in production systems
On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 08:52 +0100, Alberto García Sola wrote: > Reading the documentation I find little or none information regarding > containers and Docker, but I've found a few comments in the changelog > regarding Docker. I plan to use them in a highly scalable and elastic > environment. > I wonder, what's the best way to containerize 389DS using Docker to > use in production systems? > Any considerations regarding storage (beyond being persistent)? > Any experiences using Docker and 389DS in production systems? Hi there, I'm currently working on docker support in 389-ds. The current status is "almost there", but before I approve it for use I have a high standard I want to meet. I want our support to be the best possible. I want to be able to redefine root password via envariables, and I want to be able to configure the server via environment or some other means that would work nicely in something like kubernetes so you can then have scripted scaling for replicas. We also have some plans for inplace upgrades (rather than the perl scripts) so that containers can upgrade at run time rather than relying on rpm/deb to run upgrade scripts. Today, you can run ds in a container, but you need to build the /etc/dirsrv/slapd- directory "seperately" and then bring that to the container. If you are interested in testing the current image, I can provide steps on using it, and if you have some use cases or ideas, I'd love to hear them. I really want our docker support ready in the next few months. Thanks! > Regards, > Alberto. > ___ > 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.o > rg -- Thanks, William Brown ___ 389-users mailing list -- 389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to 389-users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
