14 ms·

Docker for Mac and Windows Is Now Generally Available and Ready for Production

599 points by samber 10y ago

senex 10y ago
I've been tracking the beta for a while. I'm confused about this announcement. These issues still seem unresolved? (1) docker can peg the CPU until it's restarted https://forums.docker.com/t/com-docker-xhyve-and-com-docker-osxfs-cpu-usage/10537/32 https://forums.docker.com/t/com-docker-xhyve-and-com-docker-... (2) pinata was removed, so it can't be configured from CLI scripts https://forums.docker.com/t/pinata-missing-in-latest-mac-beta-1-11-2-beta15/15541 https://forums.docker.com/t/pinata-missing-in-latest-mac-bet... (3) it's not possible to establish an ip-level route from the host to a container, which many dev environments depend on https://forums.docker.com/t/ip-routing-to-container/8424/14 https://forums.docker.com/t/ip-routing-to-container/8424/14 (4) filesystem can be slow https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-extremely-slow-cpu-bound/8076/168 https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-e... Are these fixed in stable? I'm personally stuck transitioning from docker-machine and (from the comments) it seems like other folks are as well...
- hijinks 10y ago
  I was an early user of the mac beta and the 100% cpu would happen 2-3 times daily. Now it maybe happens once every 2 weeks. Not sure about the others but the CPU isn't much an issue anymore. Maybe its just me being use to how bad it was.
  - 010a 10y ago
    I've been heavily using it since what must have been early closed beta, and cannot recall ever having this issue. Might be something that isn't quite so widespread.
    - DigitalJack 10y ago
      It's about weekly for me on mac.
    - justincormack 10y ago
      It only happens with a few users, and not at all to the majority. It seems to happen more on older OSX versions, but beyond that there has not been anything identifiable in common about the systems it happens on unfortunately.
- jmspring 10y ago
  Sadly, the state of things, be it the Docker ecosystem or others, "ready for production" means something much different than it did years ago. For me, the definition of ready for production, Debian is a good example of the opposite end of Docker.
  - gtirloni 10y ago
    Exactly. "Ready for production" and "industrial" are constantly abused. All these tools are awesome and we use them, but PROPERLY deploying and supporting them in production is far from painless (or easy).
  - rhinoceraptor 10y ago
    I think by 'production', they mean 'ready for general use on developer laptops'. No one in their right mind is deploying actual production software on Docker, on OS X/Windows. I've been using it on my laptop daily for a month or two now, and it's been great. Certainly much better than the old Virtualbox setup.
    - mherrmann 10y ago
      I'm still using VirtualBox. Could you elaborate why Docker is better?
      - numbsafari 10y ago
        Leaving containers vs VMs aside, docker for Mac leverages a custom hypervisor rather than VirtualBox. My overall experience with it is that it is more performant (generally), plays better with the system clock and power management, and is otherwise less cumbersome than VirtualBox. They are just getting started, but getting rid of VirtualBox is the big winner for me.
        mherrmann 10y ago
        Thanks!
        10y ago
- girvo 10y ago
  The filesystem is still not as fast as I would like, but it's incredibly improved over the last couple months. One thing I found, was to be a little more cautious about what host volumes you mount into a container: for a Symfony project, mounting `src` instead of the whole folder sped up the project considerably, as Symfony's caching thrashes the file-system by default.
- jonesetc 10y ago
  I have also yet to see a reasonable solution for connecting out of a container back to the host with Docker.app. On linux and OSX with docker-machine this is easy with: docker run --add-host host:ip.for.docker.interface foo But there is no equivalent to the docker0 interface or the vboxnet interface for Docker.app. EDIT: I don't use this for any production environments, but it is very useful for debugging and testing.
  - colordrops 10y ago
    What about getting the gateway address from inside the container: HOST_IP=$(/sbin/ip route | awk '/default/ { print $3 }')
    - divideby0 10y ago
      That works for some use cases, but for others (Elasticsearch, Zookeeper, Kafka, etc) the service inside the container needs to bind to an interface associated with an IP that's also addressable by the host. Even in host networking mode, eth0 inside a DFM-powered container will bound something like 192.168.x.y but that 192.168.x.0 subnet is completely inaccessible from the host.
  - justincormack 10y ago
    The best solution is to add a new stable, unconflicting IP address to the loopback interface on the Mac and connect to that.
    - jonesetc 10y ago
      Still not as friendly, as it requires system changes on the host, but not totally unreasonable. I'll give it a try if I evaluate Docker.app again.
  - moondev 10y ago
    why not just bind a port with -p
- thejosh 10y ago
  Fixing the file system is going to be a very hard/impossible task.
  - jaequery 10y ago
    They should just go with nfs mounts it is at least 10 times faster than what they have now
- qubit23 10y ago
  This is another issue that's been preventing my adoption of Docker for Mac: https://forums.docker.com/t/docker-pull-not-using-correct-dns-server-when-private-registry-on-vpn/11117/20 https://forums.docker.com/t/docker-pull-not-using-correct-dn.... The fact that DNS resolution over a VPN still doesn't work correctly makes me wonder how production-worthy this release is. It's a pretty common thing people want to do in my experience.
  - turnip1979 10y ago
    Sigh .. I need to disconnect from VPN to use it. I think u can reconnect after creation.
  - djs55 10y ago
    If you have the time, could you make a report on the issue tracker https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues and include the contents of /etc/resolv.conf and "scutil --dns" when you connect and disconnect to your VPN? Ideally also include an example resolution of a name by the host with something like "dig @server internalname". I suspect the problem is caused by a DNS server in the "scutil" list being missing from /etc/resolv.conf. We're planning on watching the "scutil --dns" list for changes, but it's not implemented completely yet.
    - qubit23 10y ago
      Okay, will do. Resolution of internal hostnames by their FQDN works fine if I set my VPN client (Tunnelblick) to rewrite /etc/resolv.conf. That said, the search domain is not carried into the VM, so name resolution by hostname does not work. Also, Tunnelblick has a name resolution mode that does split DNS (i.e. preserves DHCP-set DNS servers and only forwards DNS requests for the internal domain to the VPN DNS servers). This mode doesn't work at all. Would it be possible to allow forwarding of DNS requests to the host machine like with Virtualbox (VBoxManage modifyvm "VM name" --natdnshostresolver1 on)? I feel like that would simplify things greatly.
- dcosson 10y ago
  I had a similar experience trying to switch to docker-machine as it sounds like you've had with the new apps, and ended up giving up. It's super simple through Vagrant though, just vagrant up and set DOCKER_HOST to the static IP. Plus there are vagrant plugins that let you sync a directory to the vm in a way that gives you inotify events so live build/update tools can run in your containers (which btw is huge, I can't believe the official apps haven't even attempted to address that, as far as I've seen).
  - RussianCow 10y ago
    > Plus there are vagrant plugins that let you sync a directory to the vm in a way that gives you inotify events so live build/update tools can run in your containers (which btw is huge, I can't believe the official apps haven't even attempted to address that, as far as I've seen). If you don't mind, what are these plugins? This is one thing that's sorely missed when I do development with Vagrant. I did a small amount of searching and trial and error, but couldn't find a solution that worked for me.
    - maccam94 10y ago
      There used to be a separate vagrant plugin for rsync but it's now built-in. There is also built-in support for NFS and virtualbox/vmware synced folders. These all work reasonably well until you start having fairly large numbers of files/directories. Also if you use a native Linux host with LXC or Docker there is no overhead for sharing directories with the container, it's just a bind mount.
      - RussianCow 10y ago
        I don't believe NFS supports inotify events? At least, that's what I'm using, and I'm forced to use polling for any file change detection. And rsync is one-way IIRC. But yes, LXC on Linux works great when it's feasible; I've just been looking for something that supports file change detection on other platforms.
  - zwily 10y ago
    The official apps do do that. It's one reason their shared fs performance is abysmal so far.
- slidese 10y ago
  I always thought of production ready to be stable, of all things. Feature complete is not a part of it. Basically, if you can live with the shortcomings a release has (bugs, performance, lack of features) you can use it in production as long as it's stable (and secure).
  - hueving 10y ago
    I wouldn't consider pegging a CPU until restart to be 'stable'.
    - slidese 10y ago
      True. So that gives us one issue then?
      - jacalata 10y ago
        "Aside from that Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?"
    - slidese 10y ago
      But this release aside, I was more commenting on the whole concept of production ready.
    - avsm 10y ago
      This bug's been driving us mad because we can't reliably repro it on our machines at Docker, and it only happens to a small subset of users, but is very annoying when it goes trigger. It seems to be related to the OSX version involved, but there's not enough bug reports to reliably hone in on it. The other aspect that it may be is a long-running Docker.app -- since as developers we are frequently killing and restarting the application, it could happen after a period of time. I've now got two laptops that I work on, and one of them has no Homebrew or developer tools installed outside of containers, and runs the stable version of Docker.app that's just been released. If this can trigger the bug, we will hunt it down and fix it :-) In the meanwhile, if anyone can trigger it and get a backtrace of the com.docker process, that would be most helpful. Bug reports can go on https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues
- jaequery 10y ago
  I wish they just adopt what dinghy did, xhyce with nfs mounts and dns server
- amazingman 10y ago
  Not to mention the lack of host:container socket sharing and the fact that the Moby VM time drifts due to system sleep. I love Docker for Mac, I use it every day, and it's definitely still beta quality.
  - justincormack 10y ago
    How much does your time drift? We changed the mechanism so that it should sync from the OSX ntp server now, which seems to be giving good results. If you are having problems can you create an issue and we can look into it. Host container socket sharing will come, but it is complex as sockets only exist with in a single operating system, so we have to bridge them across two. We are using this for the docker socket, and debugging the issues across Mac and Windows, so it is in the roadmap.
    - amazingman 10y ago
      Actually GA may have fixed this. I was able to reproduce it, but may have checked too quickly. I opened https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/17 https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/17 against it, and may end up closing it.
- mpermar 10y ago
  Number (3) is specially painful. The fact that their documentation makes it very explicit that the host is bridged by default and containers are "pingable" aggravates it a little bit further as it seems as a very basic pre-requisite for the tool to be usable.
- coleca 10y ago
  For #3 that is an issue for remote debugging with things like XDebug for PHP. I have been using this command: sudo ifconfig lo0 alias 10.254.254.254 And setting the remote host to 10.254.254.254 instead of localhost inside the container to work around that issue. It's been working pretty well. I've been using the Beta version of Docker for Mac for many months and haven't had many issues with it at all. The biggest issue I've seen was the QCow file not releasing space and growing to 60+GB, but deleting it and restarting Docker did the trick (although I had to rebuild or repull any containers).
- aleem 10y ago
  I can't get it to work on OSX without the CPU staying at 100%. Still not fixed: > There are several other threads on this topic already. Setups that docker build an image and rely on in-Docker storage work well; setups that rely heavily on bind-mounting host directories do not. A complex npm install in a bind-mounted directory breaks Docker entirely, according to at least one thread here. https://forums.docker.com/t/just-switched-over-from-dlite-cpu-usage-through-the-roof-beta-is-unusable/12809/2 https://forums.docker.com/t/just-switched-over-from-dlite-cp...
- kentt 10y ago
  The last one, in my experience, is basically a deal breaker. Simple commands (eg rake routes, npm install, etc) take 100x longer. I'm don't have a firm opinion on what is or isn't 'production ready', but if there are major bugs, then there should be some way of disseminating that information instead of everyone rediscovering the same issues.
- jokoon 10y ago
  I wonder, is microsoft helping to solve those issues? If they are, it shouldn't take too long.
- eugenmayer 10y ago
  for 4) you can use http://docker-sync.io http://docker-sync.io - its compatible with docker for mac and others, supports rsync/unison/unison+unox and will have NFS support in the near future. With unison+unox you have full transparent sync while having native performance (no performance loss at all). This is far better the osxfs or nfs.
slantedview 10y ago
I need nested virtualization as well. I don't know if this is possible with the hypervisor being used, but it's hugely important for me.
- gtirloni 10y ago
  I'm not sure about xhyve, but I vaguely remember Hyper-V supports nested virtualization but only on Windows guests. Something Microsoft seems to need that for the upcoming Windows containers. Your best option for nested virtualization seems to be qemu, but you don't need virtualization for Docker on Linux so it's pointless. VirtualBox doesn't support nested virtualization either.
- mintplant 10y ago
  Curious, can you share what you need it for?
  - bashed 10y ago
    Looks like you need nested virtualization for running windows xp apps within the new newer windows systems. I'm also curious about other uses for it. Why is it a must have when you could technically just use a virtual windows xp system. I guess running a legacy application in a more secure and newer OS?
  - slantedview 10y ago
    Basically for hacking on cloud software that runs hypervisors such as kvm. docker-machine with a VMWare Fusion VM and nested virtualization enabled is the current approach I use - works fine for now.
- mrmondo 10y ago
  Absolutely, I too would really like this, especially if you could easily do PCIe / Thunderbolt passthrough for GPUs.
girvo 10y ago
Absolutely love Docker.app, it's made life so much simpler at work for all of us, and performance has been increasing steadily (though it's still not 1:1 with boot2docker-xhyve).
yladiz 10y ago
I don't use Docker much now, but in my experience the reliance on Virtualbox (on Mac) was a little clunky and annoying, and I really wished for native support without Virtualbox. I'm super happy to see that's here!
- gtirloni 10y ago
  I think it makes sense to depend on the "native" virtualization solutions for each operating system (Hyper-V and xhyve). We have been using Vagrant and VirtualBox heavily and the new Docker for Windows/Mac is making us reconsider that since you can't easily use more than one hypervisor on the same dev machine without some hassle. We might be building our Vagrant boxes for these other hypervisors soon. VirtualBox still seems easier to work with but there isn't anything much exciting happening with it lately. Let's see...
  - amorphid 10y ago
    I believe xhyve works fine with recent versions of VirtualBox, since xhyve is a pure userland app (aka no kernel extensions). Check out the issues section in the xhyve readme... https://github.com/mist64/xhyve/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/mist64/xhyve/blob/master/README.md
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - sigjuice 10y ago
      xhyve needs to interact with all kinds of low-level things so there has to be kernel code involved. xhyve does not install kernel extensions of its own like VirtualBox or VMWare Fusion. xhyve uses the kernel extensions provided by Apple (com.apple.driver.AppleHV and possibly others).
      - amorphid 10y ago
        Ah, that makes sense. It doesn't install anything extensions of it's own, only using the kernel bits provided by Hypervisor.framework.
cowmix 10y ago
I love Docker for Mac but I have had a problem of containers just disappearing after running for a while.
- lahdekorpi 10y ago
  It has a pretty good logging, have you taken a look if it crashes or something?
jaequery 10y ago
Anyone know if the volume ozone performance have been improved to at least the level of nfs method? This is what keeps me away from using the docket for Mac and just sticking to dinghy until this is fixed
- Axsuul 10y ago
  Would like to know this as well. Docker for Mac performance is still horrible.
turnip1979 10y ago
Does this thing work on Windows 10 home edition? That doesn't have hyperv I think.
- kristianp 10y ago
  No it won't work, you're right it seems: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyperv_on_windows/quick_start/walkthrough_compatibility https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyperv_on_wi...
Todd 10y ago
I just installed D4W a few days ago for the first time. It's been great. It's a seamless experience on W10 Pro with Hyper-V. I've used VirtualBox a lot and I like it but I always have to fuss with the network bridge and such. With this, it's hard to tell I'm even using a VM. Their network port mapping is seamless. FYI, I was using rc4 and I didn't see any information on how to upgrade (should I uninstall first?). I ran the release setup and it did an in-place upgrade, deleting earlier components and such.
- sootzoo 10y ago
  My experience has been the auto-upgrade works without requiring reinstall (and indeed just did so to GA last night). I don't think there's any specific fresh install requirement.
spilk 10y ago
Can I run my usual VirtualBox VMs I have running for everything else (non-docker related) alongside Docker for Windows yet? When I tried one of the betas it enabled Hyper-V which prevented me from using any of my other VMs.
- jimlei 10y ago
  Wondering about this myself, going to write up a tutorial soon for people I know who use Windows. Last time I tried Docker for Windows it broke VirtualBox completely (just had to disable Hyper-V). Might be an easy fix for that though, didn't spend any time investigating
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- gtirloni 10y ago
  You can have just one hypervisor working at any given time. So, no, you can't use your VirtualBox VMs while a Docker container is running in this way (because it'd be using Hyper-V/xhyve).
cyzhu 10y ago
Greate! It's hard to install it before.
ben_jones 10y ago
Can I expect a dockerfile that 100% works on Linux to 100% on Mac and Windows?
- ktzar 10y ago
  Short answer, yes. Medium answer, images your Dockerfile is based on are still run in a Linux environment, even if it's virtualised differently.
  - adamhepner 10y ago
    Wait now, hold on a minute. I'm very confused and curious how does this work? Can I run any linux-based container on Windows? Can I run (are there any?) windows-based containers? If so, does it work the other way around: windows container on linux host? Does it somehow use the recently published Linux Subsystem for Windows, or is it completely different compatibility layer? If it is different, doesn't it seem like a waste of effort?
    - jimlei 10y ago
      > Can I run any linux-based container on Windows? No, on windows you still have to run a Linux vm which the containers will run inside. Meaning all containers actually run on a Linux host. The new Docker for Windows app only abstract away some stuff so it feels easier working with. > does it work the other way around No
      - mh-cx 10y ago
        > No, on windows you still have to run a Linux vm which the containers will run inside. I don't think, that's correct. To me that's the whole point of having a native Windows / Mac version of docker. From their feature list: > Faster and more reliable – native development environment using hypervisors built into each operating system. (No more VirtualBox!)
        drdaeman 10y ago
AjithAntony 10y ago
ARGH! I can't use Hyper-V on this hardware (no SLAT support).
johnchristopher 10y ago
Last time I checked it didn't support 32 bits but could be tested on Windows 7. Now I see it requires `Microsoft Windows 10 Professional or Enterprise 64-bit For previous versions get Docker Toolbox`.
- cptskippy 10y ago
  Yeah, that's part of why this release baffles me. From 1.11 to 1.12 they dumped VirtualBox in favor of the latest version of Hyper-V which why it only supports Windows 10. That's a pretty significant change in my mind but it didn't seem to extend their testing/validation timeline at all.
cybernazi 10y ago
It won't work on Windows 7, 8. It needs Windows 10 pro or enterprise to work.
cybernazi 10y ago
It won't work on Windows 7, 8. It needs Windows 10 pro or enterprise to work.
voltagex_ 10y ago
On Windows, Hyper-V doesn't really play nicely with laptops. If you've got it enabled and bridged to your wifi adapter, Windows 10 may think that your connection is Ethernet and turn off all bandwidth saving features. I only found out after Windows Update had exhausted my monthly LTE quota.
- drdaeman 10y ago
  Speaking about Windows, it is also disabled on Windows 10 Home and only available on Pro edition. Hope they'll maintain VirtualBox support as a first-class citizen (well, given that it was the most mature option during the beta period, suppose they will).
esseti 10y ago
is anyone having troubles with docker-compose (on mac)? It seems that ports are not forwarded/opened.
HerpDerpLerp 10y ago
"This version of Docker requires Windows 10 Pro, Enterprise or Education edition with a minimum build number of 10586. Please use Docker Toolbox." :(
- ZenoArrow 10y ago
  That'll be because Windows 10 is the first desktop Windows OS with support for Hyper-V. If you didn't want to use Windows 10, perhaps you might have some more luck with a Windows Server OS. Does anyone know if the latest version of Docker will work on Windows Server 2012?
  - friism 10y ago
    Client Hyper-V actually showed up in Windows 8 [1], but only recent versions of Windows 10 have Hyper-V with all the features needed by Docker for Windows. [1]: http://www.howtogeek.com/196158/how-to-create-and-run-virtual-machines-with-hyper-v/ http://www.howtogeek.com/196158/how-to-create-and-run-virtua...
- tdkl 10y ago
  Meaning it doesn't run on LTSB as well (10240). Too bad, it's the only sane version of Windows 10 yet.
sheraz 10y ago
Good to see they are moving forward, but I have a working rig at the moment with virtual box. "If it ain't broke, then don't fix it" is a motto I live by. Better it's your blood on the bleeding edge rather than mine :-)
Scorpiion 10y ago
An interesting fact I think is worth mentioning is that Docker for Mac uses a forked and currently closed version of xhyve, and not the same xhyve that we can find on Github. The last commit to open source xhyve was May 27. With that said Docker has plans to open source it, I wonder if that will happen soon as they declare Docker for Mac ready for production. That would imply that the xhyve port also should be ready be contributed back or spin out into a new project (the quote below said they were not sure if they wanted to contribute back or make a new project). Personally I think the "right thing to do" would be to contribute back to xhyve, at the same time I have a feeling it's more valuable for Docker Inc to "own" and control their own fork/project so I would guess they will go down that path instead (it would still be open source, just under a different project name). Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11356293 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11356293 EDIT: I stand corrected, see talex5 comment below, I had missed the hyperkit announcement.
- talex5 10y ago
  I think this is what you're looking for: https://github.com/docker/hyperkit https://github.com/docker/hyperkit Source: https://blog.docker.com/2016/05/docker-unikernels-open-source/ https://blog.docker.com/2016/05/docker-unikernels-open-sourc...
  - Scorpiion 10y ago
    Oh, my bad, thanks for the correction! :)
amq 10y ago
I've been trying to switch from VirtualBox to Hyper-V twice to use Docker for Windows, but always hit the same wall when using a desktop Linux guest: no 3D acceleration, no resolution scaling, no shared clipboard.
- lewisl9029 10y ago
  Yes, Hyper-V's Desktop UX for VMs is still in a really sad state compared to the competition, even for Windows guests, let alone Linux ones. I have it enabled to use Docker for Windows by default, but very often still need to reboot to disable it and use VMware Workstation for any serious work inside VMs, for all the reasons you listed, plus the awesome multi-monitor support in Workstation. Microsoft really needs to get its act together.
Perceptes 10y ago
Basically echoing senex's comment, but this announcement seems bizarre in light of https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-extremely-slow-cpu-bound/8076 https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-e.... In particular, a Docker employee responds with a status update in https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-extremely-slow-cpu-bound/8076 https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-e..., saying this isn't resolved for stable Docker for Mac. It's totally unusable for Rails development right now.
- nzoschke 10y ago
  The 'convox start' dev environment enables Rails dev on Docker for Mac with a custom file sync strategy. This is another case of simple solutions win... You can effectively rsync code changes without all the low level file system madness. https://convox.com/blog/bidirectional-sync/ https://convox.com/blog/bidirectional-sync/
  - Perceptes 10y ago
    Thanks. There are some workarounds posted in the thread I linked, too. Frustrating that Docker for Mac doesn't just work for the main use case (local development), though.
sz4kerto 10y ago
I still can't bind mount a file in a container if that file already exists in that containter. Is this production ready?
- avsm 10y ago
  This seems to work fine for me: docker run -it -v /private/etc/passwd:/etc/passwd alpine sh (not recommended for any actual use obviously) Is there a particular case in which this failed for you? We'd appreciate a bug report on https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues (or from the Docker for Mac GUI, just click on "Diagnose and Feedback") so we can chase down whatever issue you're having.
  - sz4kerto 10y ago
    Yes, this use case, it happens on Windows and on Mac as well. C:\Program Files\Docker\Docker\Resources\bin\docker.exe: Error response from daemon: oci runtime error: rootfs_linux.go:53: mounting "/var/lib/docker/aufs/mn t/90d24356afdeb7b9ddad4b3b6903be92063151c33bf34f3d63ede464437060c6/cryptoservice/broker-config.yml" to rootfs "/var/lib/docker/aufs/mnt/90d24356afdeb7b9ddad4 b3b6903be92063151c33bf34f3d63ede464437060c6" caused "not a directory". (I'm mounting broker-config.yml and that file is already present in the container. Most recent Docker for Win beta in this case, but getting the same on non-beta Docker for Mac.)
    - seeekr 10y ago
      The error message specifically says "not a directory" and afaik you can't mount single files, only directories. I at least have never even thought of trying to mount individual files since the bind mounting functionality in Docker seems to always and everywhere have been described in a way that suggests that it's for mounting directories, not individual files.
xutopia 10y ago
I'm finding it really funny how even Docker users can't really explain easily what Docker is.
- alex- 10y ago
  Docker is a process launcher that makes it fast and simple to start processes with a unique network/filesystem/process/user space (via cgroups and namespaces).
geekbri 10y ago
My biggest issue with it is that there seems to be no easy way to provide more space to the VM docker runs inside. While it seems trivial it can be useful if you happen to have really large images (yes, for valid reasons). If you run too many containers you just run out of space.
- cptskippy 10y ago
  I ran into this too when fooling around with SyntaxNet. It hink the default size of the VM is 16GB. I kept running out of swap space even after bumping the ram on the VM up to 16GB.
- JustinAiken 10y ago
  > While it seems trivial it can be useful if you happen to have really large images (yes, for valid reasons). I'm curious what some of these valid reasons are - why would you have a large image instead of a minimal image with all the data linked out?
jamespacileo 10y ago
Docker for Windows is unfortunately a bit gimped right now: - docker-compose isn't OS agnostic and as versions go forward Windows is lagging behind - this uses Hyper-V which blocks both Virtualbox and Vmware from running
saysjonathan 10y ago
If you have issues with the Docker for Mac on Sierra, turn off ntp: sudo launchctl unload /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/org.ntp.ntpd.plist If I see that "We are whaly happy to have you" welcome screen one more time though...
- superchink 10y ago
  Can you actually live without NTP though? Isn't that a pretty critical service?
  - zbyte64 10y ago
    One of the issues is that if your laptop goes to sleep your linux container becomes out of sync on the time. To fix this you have to restart docker.
jjmo 10y ago
Ready for production must not mean what it used to mean... :)) This thing has bugs... many bugs.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

599 points by samber 10y ago

senex 10y ago

I've been tracking the beta for a while. I'm confused about this announcement. These issues still seem unresolved? (1) docker can peg the CPU until it's restarted https://forums.docker.com/t/com-docker-xhyve-and-com-docker-osxfs-cpu-usage/10537/32 https://forums.docker.com/t/com-docker-xhyve-and-com-docker-... (2) pinata was removed, so it can't be configured from CLI scripts https://forums.docker.com/t/pinata-missing-in-latest-mac-beta-1-11-2-beta15/15541 https://forums.docker.com/t/pinata-missing-in-latest-mac-bet... (3) it's not possible to establish an ip-level route from the host to a container, which many dev environments depend on https://forums.docker.com/t/ip-routing-to-container/8424/14 https://forums.docker.com/t/ip-routing-to-container/8424/14 (4) filesystem can be slow https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-extremely-slow-cpu-bound/8076/168 https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-e... Are these fixed in stable? I'm personally stuck transitioning from docker-machine and (from the comments) it seems like other folks are as well...

hijinks 10y ago
I was an early user of the mac beta and the 100% cpu would happen 2-3 times daily. Now it maybe happens once every 2 weeks. Not sure about the others but the CPU isn't much an issue anymore. Maybe its just me being use to how bad it was.
- 010a 10y ago
  I've been heavily using it since what must have been early closed beta, and cannot recall ever having this issue. Might be something that isn't quite so widespread.
  - DigitalJack 10y ago
    It's about weekly for me on mac.
  - justincormack 10y ago
    It only happens with a few users, and not at all to the majority. It seems to happen more on older OSX versions, but beyond that there has not been anything identifiable in common about the systems it happens on unfortunately.
jmspring 10y ago
Sadly, the state of things, be it the Docker ecosystem or others, "ready for production" means something much different than it did years ago. For me, the definition of ready for production, Debian is a good example of the opposite end of Docker.
- gtirloni 10y ago
  Exactly. "Ready for production" and "industrial" are constantly abused. All these tools are awesome and we use them, but PROPERLY deploying and supporting them in production is far from painless (or easy).
- rhinoceraptor 10y ago
  I think by 'production', they mean 'ready for general use on developer laptops'. No one in their right mind is deploying actual production software on Docker, on OS X/Windows. I've been using it on my laptop daily for a month or two now, and it's been great. Certainly much better than the old Virtualbox setup.
  - mherrmann 10y ago
    I'm still using VirtualBox. Could you elaborate why Docker is better?
    - numbsafari 10y ago
      Leaving containers vs VMs aside, docker for Mac leverages a custom hypervisor rather than VirtualBox. My overall experience with it is that it is more performant (generally), plays better with the system clock and power management, and is otherwise less cumbersome than VirtualBox. They are just getting started, but getting rid of VirtualBox is the big winner for me.
      - mherrmann 10y ago
        Thanks!
      - 10y ago
girvo 10y ago
The filesystem is still not as fast as I would like, but it's incredibly improved over the last couple months. One thing I found, was to be a little more cautious about what host volumes you mount into a container: for a Symfony project, mounting `src` instead of the whole folder sped up the project considerably, as Symfony's caching thrashes the file-system by default.
jonesetc 10y ago
I have also yet to see a reasonable solution for connecting out of a container back to the host with Docker.app. On linux and OSX with docker-machine this is easy with: docker run --add-host host:ip.for.docker.interface foo But there is no equivalent to the docker0 interface or the vboxnet interface for Docker.app. EDIT: I don't use this for any production environments, but it is very useful for debugging and testing.
- colordrops 10y ago
  What about getting the gateway address from inside the container: HOST_IP=$(/sbin/ip route | awk '/default/ { print $3 }')
  - divideby0 10y ago
    That works for some use cases, but for others (Elasticsearch, Zookeeper, Kafka, etc) the service inside the container needs to bind to an interface associated with an IP that's also addressable by the host. Even in host networking mode, eth0 inside a DFM-powered container will bound something like 192.168.x.y but that 192.168.x.0 subnet is completely inaccessible from the host.
- justincormack 10y ago
  The best solution is to add a new stable, unconflicting IP address to the loopback interface on the Mac and connect to that.
  - jonesetc 10y ago
    Still not as friendly, as it requires system changes on the host, but not totally unreasonable. I'll give it a try if I evaluate Docker.app again.
- moondev 10y ago
  why not just bind a port with -p
thejosh 10y ago
Fixing the file system is going to be a very hard/impossible task.
- jaequery 10y ago
  They should just go with nfs mounts it is at least 10 times faster than what they have now
qubit23 10y ago
This is another issue that's been preventing my adoption of Docker for Mac: https://forums.docker.com/t/docker-pull-not-using-correct-dns-server-when-private-registry-on-vpn/11117/20 https://forums.docker.com/t/docker-pull-not-using-correct-dn.... The fact that DNS resolution over a VPN still doesn't work correctly makes me wonder how production-worthy this release is. It's a pretty common thing people want to do in my experience.
- turnip1979 10y ago
  Sigh .. I need to disconnect from VPN to use it. I think u can reconnect after creation.
- djs55 10y ago
  If you have the time, could you make a report on the issue tracker https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues and include the contents of /etc/resolv.conf and "scutil --dns" when you connect and disconnect to your VPN? Ideally also include an example resolution of a name by the host with something like "dig @server internalname". I suspect the problem is caused by a DNS server in the "scutil" list being missing from /etc/resolv.conf. We're planning on watching the "scutil --dns" list for changes, but it's not implemented completely yet.
  - qubit23 10y ago
    Okay, will do. Resolution of internal hostnames by their FQDN works fine if I set my VPN client (Tunnelblick) to rewrite /etc/resolv.conf. That said, the search domain is not carried into the VM, so name resolution by hostname does not work. Also, Tunnelblick has a name resolution mode that does split DNS (i.e. preserves DHCP-set DNS servers and only forwards DNS requests for the internal domain to the VPN DNS servers). This mode doesn't work at all. Would it be possible to allow forwarding of DNS requests to the host machine like with Virtualbox (VBoxManage modifyvm "VM name" --natdnshostresolver1 on)? I feel like that would simplify things greatly.
dcosson 10y ago
I had a similar experience trying to switch to docker-machine as it sounds like you've had with the new apps, and ended up giving up. It's super simple through Vagrant though, just vagrant up and set DOCKER_HOST to the static IP. Plus there are vagrant plugins that let you sync a directory to the vm in a way that gives you inotify events so live build/update tools can run in your containers (which btw is huge, I can't believe the official apps haven't even attempted to address that, as far as I've seen).
- RussianCow 10y ago
  > Plus there are vagrant plugins that let you sync a directory to the vm in a way that gives you inotify events so live build/update tools can run in your containers (which btw is huge, I can't believe the official apps haven't even attempted to address that, as far as I've seen). If you don't mind, what are these plugins? This is one thing that's sorely missed when I do development with Vagrant. I did a small amount of searching and trial and error, but couldn't find a solution that worked for me.
  - maccam94 10y ago
    There used to be a separate vagrant plugin for rsync but it's now built-in. There is also built-in support for NFS and virtualbox/vmware synced folders. These all work reasonably well until you start having fairly large numbers of files/directories. Also if you use a native Linux host with LXC or Docker there is no overhead for sharing directories with the container, it's just a bind mount.
    - RussianCow 10y ago
      I don't believe NFS supports inotify events? At least, that's what I'm using, and I'm forced to use polling for any file change detection. And rsync is one-way IIRC. But yes, LXC on Linux works great when it's feasible; I've just been looking for something that supports file change detection on other platforms.
- zwily 10y ago
  The official apps do do that. It's one reason their shared fs performance is abysmal so far.
slidese 10y ago
I always thought of production ready to be stable, of all things. Feature complete is not a part of it. Basically, if you can live with the shortcomings a release has (bugs, performance, lack of features) you can use it in production as long as it's stable (and secure).
- hueving 10y ago
  I wouldn't consider pegging a CPU until restart to be 'stable'.
  - slidese 10y ago
    True. So that gives us one issue then?
    - jacalata 10y ago
      "Aside from that Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?"
  - slidese 10y ago
    But this release aside, I was more commenting on the whole concept of production ready.
  - avsm 10y ago
    This bug's been driving us mad because we can't reliably repro it on our machines at Docker, and it only happens to a small subset of users, but is very annoying when it goes trigger. It seems to be related to the OSX version involved, but there's not enough bug reports to reliably hone in on it. The other aspect that it may be is a long-running Docker.app -- since as developers we are frequently killing and restarting the application, it could happen after a period of time. I've now got two laptops that I work on, and one of them has no Homebrew or developer tools installed outside of containers, and runs the stable version of Docker.app that's just been released. If this can trigger the bug, we will hunt it down and fix it :-) In the meanwhile, if anyone can trigger it and get a backtrace of the com.docker process, that would be most helpful. Bug reports can go on https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues
jaequery 10y ago
I wish they just adopt what dinghy did, xhyce with nfs mounts and dns server
amazingman 10y ago
Not to mention the lack of host:container socket sharing and the fact that the Moby VM time drifts due to system sleep. I love Docker for Mac, I use it every day, and it's definitely still beta quality.
- justincormack 10y ago
  How much does your time drift? We changed the mechanism so that it should sync from the OSX ntp server now, which seems to be giving good results. If you are having problems can you create an issue and we can look into it. Host container socket sharing will come, but it is complex as sockets only exist with in a single operating system, so we have to bridge them across two. We are using this for the docker socket, and debugging the issues across Mac and Windows, so it is in the roadmap.
  - amazingman 10y ago
    Actually GA may have fixed this. I was able to reproduce it, but may have checked too quickly. I opened https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/17 https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues/17 against it, and may end up closing it.
mpermar 10y ago
Number (3) is specially painful. The fact that their documentation makes it very explicit that the host is bridged by default and containers are "pingable" aggravates it a little bit further as it seems as a very basic pre-requisite for the tool to be usable.
coleca 10y ago
For #3 that is an issue for remote debugging with things like XDebug for PHP. I have been using this command: sudo ifconfig lo0 alias 10.254.254.254 And setting the remote host to 10.254.254.254 instead of localhost inside the container to work around that issue. It's been working pretty well. I've been using the Beta version of Docker for Mac for many months and haven't had many issues with it at all. The biggest issue I've seen was the QCow file not releasing space and growing to 60+GB, but deleting it and restarting Docker did the trick (although I had to rebuild or repull any containers).
aleem 10y ago
I can't get it to work on OSX without the CPU staying at 100%. Still not fixed: > There are several other threads on this topic already. Setups that docker build an image and rely on in-Docker storage work well; setups that rely heavily on bind-mounting host directories do not. A complex npm install in a bind-mounted directory breaks Docker entirely, according to at least one thread here. https://forums.docker.com/t/just-switched-over-from-dlite-cpu-usage-through-the-roof-beta-is-unusable/12809/2 https://forums.docker.com/t/just-switched-over-from-dlite-cp...
kentt 10y ago
The last one, in my experience, is basically a deal breaker. Simple commands (eg rake routes, npm install, etc) take 100x longer. I'm don't have a firm opinion on what is or isn't 'production ready', but if there are major bugs, then there should be some way of disseminating that information instead of everyone rediscovering the same issues.
jokoon 10y ago
I wonder, is microsoft helping to solve those issues? If they are, it shouldn't take too long.
eugenmayer 10y ago
for 4) you can use http://docker-sync.io http://docker-sync.io - its compatible with docker for mac and others, supports rsync/unison/unison+unox and will have NFS support in the near future. With unison+unox you have full transparent sync while having native performance (no performance loss at all). This is far better the osxfs or nfs.

slantedview 10y ago

I need nested virtualization as well. I don't know if this is possible with the hypervisor being used, but it's hugely important for me.

gtirloni 10y ago
I'm not sure about xhyve, but I vaguely remember Hyper-V supports nested virtualization but only on Windows guests. Something Microsoft seems to need that for the upcoming Windows containers. Your best option for nested virtualization seems to be qemu, but you don't need virtualization for Docker on Linux so it's pointless. VirtualBox doesn't support nested virtualization either.
mintplant 10y ago
Curious, can you share what you need it for?
- bashed 10y ago
  Looks like you need nested virtualization for running windows xp apps within the new newer windows systems. I'm also curious about other uses for it. Why is it a must have when you could technically just use a virtual windows xp system. I guess running a legacy application in a more secure and newer OS?
- slantedview 10y ago
  Basically for hacking on cloud software that runs hypervisors such as kvm. docker-machine with a VMWare Fusion VM and nested virtualization enabled is the current approach I use - works fine for now.
mrmondo 10y ago
Absolutely, I too would really like this, especially if you could easily do PCIe / Thunderbolt passthrough for GPUs.

girvo 10y ago

Absolutely love Docker.app, it's made life so much simpler at work for all of us, and performance has been increasing steadily (though it's still not 1:1 with boot2docker-xhyve).

yladiz 10y ago

I don't use Docker much now, but in my experience the reliance on Virtualbox (on Mac) was a little clunky and annoying, and I really wished for native support without Virtualbox. I'm super happy to see that's here!

gtirloni 10y ago
I think it makes sense to depend on the "native" virtualization solutions for each operating system (Hyper-V and xhyve). We have been using Vagrant and VirtualBox heavily and the new Docker for Windows/Mac is making us reconsider that since you can't easily use more than one hypervisor on the same dev machine without some hassle. We might be building our Vagrant boxes for these other hypervisors soon. VirtualBox still seems easier to work with but there isn't anything much exciting happening with it lately. Let's see...
- amorphid 10y ago
  I believe xhyve works fine with recent versions of VirtualBox, since xhyve is a pure userland app (aka no kernel extensions). Check out the issues section in the xhyve readme... https://github.com/mist64/xhyve/blob/master/README.md https://github.com/mist64/xhyve/blob/master/README.md
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - sigjuice 10y ago
    xhyve needs to interact with all kinds of low-level things so there has to be kernel code involved. xhyve does not install kernel extensions of its own like VirtualBox or VMWare Fusion. xhyve uses the kernel extensions provided by Apple (com.apple.driver.AppleHV and possibly others).
    - amorphid 10y ago
      Ah, that makes sense. It doesn't install anything extensions of it's own, only using the kernel bits provided by Hypervisor.framework.

cowmix 10y ago

I love Docker for Mac but I have had a problem of containers just disappearing after running for a while.

lahdekorpi 10y ago
It has a pretty good logging, have you taken a look if it crashes or something?

jaequery 10y ago

Anyone know if the volume ozone performance have been improved to at least the level of nfs method? This is what keeps me away from using the docket for Mac and just sticking to dinghy until this is fixed

Axsuul 10y ago
Would like to know this as well. Docker for Mac performance is still horrible.

turnip1979 10y ago

Does this thing work on Windows 10 home edition? That doesn't have hyperv I think.

kristianp 10y ago
No it won't work, you're right it seems: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyperv_on_windows/quick_start/walkthrough_compatibility https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/virtualization/hyperv_on_wi...

Todd 10y ago

I just installed D4W a few days ago for the first time. It's been great. It's a seamless experience on W10 Pro with Hyper-V. I've used VirtualBox a lot and I like it but I always have to fuss with the network bridge and such. With this, it's hard to tell I'm even using a VM. Their network port mapping is seamless. FYI, I was using rc4 and I didn't see any information on how to upgrade (should I uninstall first?). I ran the release setup and it did an in-place upgrade, deleting earlier components and such.

sootzoo 10y ago
My experience has been the auto-upgrade works without requiring reinstall (and indeed just did so to GA last night). I don't think there's any specific fresh install requirement.

spilk 10y ago

Can I run my usual VirtualBox VMs I have running for everything else (non-docker related) alongside Docker for Windows yet? When I tried one of the betas it enabled Hyper-V which prevented me from using any of my other VMs.

jimlei 10y ago
Wondering about this myself, going to write up a tutorial soon for people I know who use Windows. Last time I tried Docker for Windows it broke VirtualBox completely (just had to disable Hyper-V). Might be an easy fix for that though, didn't spend any time investigating
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
gtirloni 10y ago
You can have just one hypervisor working at any given time. So, no, you can't use your VirtualBox VMs while a Docker container is running in this way (because it'd be using Hyper-V/xhyve).

cyzhu 10y ago

Greate! It's hard to install it before.

ben_jones 10y ago

Can I expect a dockerfile that 100% works on Linux to 100% on Mac and Windows?

ktzar 10y ago
Short answer, yes. Medium answer, images your Dockerfile is based on are still run in a Linux environment, even if it's virtualised differently.
- adamhepner 10y ago
  Wait now, hold on a minute. I'm very confused and curious how does this work? Can I run any linux-based container on Windows? Can I run (are there any?) windows-based containers? If so, does it work the other way around: windows container on linux host? Does it somehow use the recently published Linux Subsystem for Windows, or is it completely different compatibility layer? If it is different, doesn't it seem like a waste of effort?
  - jimlei 10y ago
    > Can I run any linux-based container on Windows? No, on windows you still have to run a Linux vm which the containers will run inside. Meaning all containers actually run on a Linux host. The new Docker for Windows app only abstract away some stuff so it feels easier working with. > does it work the other way around No
    - mh-cx 10y ago
      > No, on windows you still have to run a Linux vm which the containers will run inside. I don't think, that's correct. To me that's the whole point of having a native Windows / Mac version of docker. From their feature list: > Faster and more reliable – native development environment using hypervisors built into each operating system. (No more VirtualBox!)
      - drdaeman 10y ago

AjithAntony 10y ago

ARGH! I can't use Hyper-V on this hardware (no SLAT support).

johnchristopher 10y ago

Last time I checked it didn't support 32 bits but could be tested on Windows 7. Now I see it requires `Microsoft Windows 10 Professional or Enterprise 64-bit For previous versions get Docker Toolbox`.

cptskippy 10y ago
Yeah, that's part of why this release baffles me. From 1.11 to 1.12 they dumped VirtualBox in favor of the latest version of Hyper-V which why it only supports Windows 10. That's a pretty significant change in my mind but it didn't seem to extend their testing/validation timeline at all.

cybernazi 10y ago

It won't work on Windows 7, 8. It needs Windows 10 pro or enterprise to work.

cybernazi 10y ago

It won't work on Windows 7, 8. It needs Windows 10 pro or enterprise to work.

voltagex_ 10y ago

On Windows, Hyper-V doesn't really play nicely with laptops. If you've got it enabled and bridged to your wifi adapter, Windows 10 may think that your connection is Ethernet and turn off all bandwidth saving features. I only found out after Windows Update had exhausted my monthly LTE quota.

drdaeman 10y ago
Speaking about Windows, it is also disabled on Windows 10 Home and only available on Pro edition. Hope they'll maintain VirtualBox support as a first-class citizen (well, given that it was the most mature option during the beta period, suppose they will).

esseti 10y ago

is anyone having troubles with docker-compose (on mac)? It seems that ports are not forwarded/opened.

HerpDerpLerp 10y ago

"This version of Docker requires Windows 10 Pro, Enterprise or Education edition with a minimum build number of 10586. Please use Docker Toolbox." :(

ZenoArrow 10y ago
That'll be because Windows 10 is the first desktop Windows OS with support for Hyper-V. If you didn't want to use Windows 10, perhaps you might have some more luck with a Windows Server OS. Does anyone know if the latest version of Docker will work on Windows Server 2012?
- friism 10y ago
  Client Hyper-V actually showed up in Windows 8 [1], but only recent versions of Windows 10 have Hyper-V with all the features needed by Docker for Windows. [1]: http://www.howtogeek.com/196158/how-to-create-and-run-virtual-machines-with-hyper-v/ http://www.howtogeek.com/196158/how-to-create-and-run-virtua...
tdkl 10y ago
Meaning it doesn't run on LTSB as well (10240). Too bad, it's the only sane version of Windows 10 yet.

sheraz 10y ago

Good to see they are moving forward, but I have a working rig at the moment with virtual box. "If it ain't broke, then don't fix it" is a motto I live by. Better it's your blood on the bleeding edge rather than mine :-)

Scorpiion 10y ago

An interesting fact I think is worth mentioning is that Docker for Mac uses a forked and currently closed version of xhyve, and not the same xhyve that we can find on Github. The last commit to open source xhyve was May 27. With that said Docker has plans to open source it, I wonder if that will happen soon as they declare Docker for Mac ready for production. That would imply that the xhyve port also should be ready be contributed back or spin out into a new project (the quote below said they were not sure if they wanted to contribute back or make a new project). Personally I think the "right thing to do" would be to contribute back to xhyve, at the same time I have a feeling it's more valuable for Docker Inc to "own" and control their own fork/project so I would guess they will go down that path instead (it would still be open source, just under a different project name). Source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11356293 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11356293 EDIT: I stand corrected, see talex5 comment below, I had missed the hyperkit announcement.

talex5 10y ago
I think this is what you're looking for: https://github.com/docker/hyperkit https://github.com/docker/hyperkit Source: https://blog.docker.com/2016/05/docker-unikernels-open-source/ https://blog.docker.com/2016/05/docker-unikernels-open-sourc...
- Scorpiion 10y ago
  Oh, my bad, thanks for the correction! :)

amq 10y ago

I've been trying to switch from VirtualBox to Hyper-V twice to use Docker for Windows, but always hit the same wall when using a desktop Linux guest: no 3D acceleration, no resolution scaling, no shared clipboard.

lewisl9029 10y ago
Yes, Hyper-V's Desktop UX for VMs is still in a really sad state compared to the competition, even for Windows guests, let alone Linux ones. I have it enabled to use Docker for Windows by default, but very often still need to reboot to disable it and use VMware Workstation for any serious work inside VMs, for all the reasons you listed, plus the awesome multi-monitor support in Workstation. Microsoft really needs to get its act together.

Perceptes 10y ago

Basically echoing senex's comment, but this announcement seems bizarre in light of https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-extremely-slow-cpu-bound/8076 https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-e.... In particular, a Docker employee responds with a status update in https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-extremely-slow-cpu-bound/8076 https://forums.docker.com/t/file-access-in-mounted-volumes-e..., saying this isn't resolved for stable Docker for Mac. It's totally unusable for Rails development right now.

nzoschke 10y ago
The 'convox start' dev environment enables Rails dev on Docker for Mac with a custom file sync strategy. This is another case of simple solutions win... You can effectively rsync code changes without all the low level file system madness. https://convox.com/blog/bidirectional-sync/ https://convox.com/blog/bidirectional-sync/
- Perceptes 10y ago
  Thanks. There are some workarounds posted in the thread I linked, too. Frustrating that Docker for Mac doesn't just work for the main use case (local development), though.

sz4kerto 10y ago

I still can't bind mount a file in a container if that file already exists in that containter. Is this production ready?

avsm 10y ago
This seems to work fine for me: docker run -it -v /private/etc/passwd:/etc/passwd alpine sh (not recommended for any actual use obviously) Is there a particular case in which this failed for you? We'd appreciate a bug report on https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues https://github.com/docker/for-mac/issues (or from the Docker for Mac GUI, just click on "Diagnose and Feedback") so we can chase down whatever issue you're having.
- sz4kerto 10y ago
  Yes, this use case, it happens on Windows and on Mac as well. C:\Program Files\Docker\Docker\Resources\bin\docker.exe: Error response from daemon: oci runtime error: rootfs_linux.go:53: mounting "/var/lib/docker/aufs/mn t/90d24356afdeb7b9ddad4b3b6903be92063151c33bf34f3d63ede464437060c6/cryptoservice/broker-config.yml" to rootfs "/var/lib/docker/aufs/mnt/90d24356afdeb7b9ddad4 b3b6903be92063151c33bf34f3d63ede464437060c6" caused "not a directory". (I'm mounting broker-config.yml and that file is already present in the container. Most recent Docker for Win beta in this case, but getting the same on non-beta Docker for Mac.)
  - seeekr 10y ago
    The error message specifically says "not a directory" and afaik you can't mount single files, only directories. I at least have never even thought of trying to mount individual files since the bind mounting functionality in Docker seems to always and everywhere have been described in a way that suggests that it's for mounting directories, not individual files.

xutopia 10y ago

I'm finding it really funny how even Docker users can't really explain easily what Docker is.

alex- 10y ago
Docker is a process launcher that makes it fast and simple to start processes with a unique network/filesystem/process/user space (via cgroups and namespaces).

geekbri 10y ago

My biggest issue with it is that there seems to be no easy way to provide more space to the VM docker runs inside. While it seems trivial it can be useful if you happen to have really large images (yes, for valid reasons). If you run too many containers you just run out of space.

cptskippy 10y ago
I ran into this too when fooling around with SyntaxNet. It hink the default size of the VM is 16GB. I kept running out of swap space even after bumping the ram on the VM up to 16GB.
JustinAiken 10y ago
> While it seems trivial it can be useful if you happen to have really large images (yes, for valid reasons). I'm curious what some of these valid reasons are - why would you have a large image instead of a minimal image with all the data linked out?

jamespacileo 10y ago

Docker for Windows is unfortunately a bit gimped right now: - docker-compose isn't OS agnostic and as versions go forward Windows is lagging behind - this uses Hyper-V which blocks both Virtualbox and Vmware from running

saysjonathan 10y ago

If you have issues with the Docker for Mac on Sierra, turn off ntp: sudo launchctl unload /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/org.ntp.ntpd.plist If I see that "We are whaly happy to have you" welcome screen one more time though...

superchink 10y ago
Can you actually live without NTP though? Isn't that a pretty critical service?
- zbyte64 10y ago
  One of the issues is that if your laptop goes to sleep your linux container becomes out of sync on the time. To fix this you have to restart docker.

jjmo 10y ago

Ready for production must not mean what it used to mean... :)) This thing has bugs... many bugs.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]