5 ms·

I run Postgres in docker containers on my Mac but I know that won’t be viable for a lot of people.

by jarym 6y ago

starbugs 6y ago
I have been running Postgres in Docker on my M1 MBP for a while now. No issues so far.
vetinari 6y ago
M1 docker is still in preview, so that's not an option for many folks running newer Macs.
fernandotakai 6y ago
i run linux and i prefer running all these kind of services (postgres, redis, rabbitmq and the likes) on docker containers. it's much easier to manage, easier to add/remove/clean and it doesn't pollute my local system with random stuff.
bottled_poe 6y ago
Yeah, if you are running Postgres natively on OSX instead of in Docker you are behind the times. I’m sure this will be downvoted, but it needs to be said.
- Doctor_Fegg 6y ago
  No it doesn’t. There are several Mac-native apps, such as QGIS, for which Postgres is a sensible local datastore. Running it in a container for this is an entirely unnecessary complication.
- jdboyd 6y ago
  How does permeance compare? Also that doesn't look like a good option for M1 mac users.
- slezyr 6y ago
  > you are behind the times Seriously? What is wrong with running programs natively without any layers in between? Also, IIRC PostgreSQL isn't recommended to be run in docker due to a possible data loss?
  - user-the-name 6y ago
    Because your average Unix program will basically spread itself all over your system, and is nearly impossible to remove. I don't want to pollute all my system directories with random gunk. Keeping things in containers keeps it from making a mess, and that alone makes it worth it, to say nothing about the advantages for handling dependencies or running multiple copies or versions.
    - Doctor_Fegg 6y ago
      The original issue is about Postgres.app which very deliberately _doesn’t_ spread itself all over your system.
    - cat199 6y ago
      your average unix program, esp. something like postgres which has been developed for literally decades, will basically spread itself into well defined compile-time locations which are easily removed by any competent package manager or even competent manual build (touch package.stamp && make install && find $prefix -cnewer -type f package.stamp > package.file-list ) It's only 'random' if you don't know what you are doing. Containers are fine and often good, but their existence/availability doesn't 'supercede' real knowledge.
- cat199 6y ago
  ... alternately, if you think running in docker is suitable for and solves all problems, you are a noob.
sixbrx 6y ago
I wonder what happens if you volume mount your MacOS files into the container, then the Docker daemon (I guess) would still have to do an open() in MacOS that could get the EINTR. Does Docker process handle it properly?

I run Postgres in docker containers on my Mac but I know that won’t be viable for a lot of people.

by jarym 6y ago

I run Postgres in docker containers on my Mac but I know that won’t be viable for a lot of people.

starbugs 6y ago

I have been running Postgres in Docker on my M1 MBP for a while now. No issues so far.

vetinari 6y ago

M1 docker is still in preview, so that's not an option for many folks running newer Macs.

fernandotakai 6y ago

i run linux and i prefer running all these kind of services (postgres, redis, rabbitmq and the likes) on docker containers. it's much easier to manage, easier to add/remove/clean and it doesn't pollute my local system with random stuff.

bottled_poe 6y ago

Yeah, if you are running Postgres natively on OSX instead of in Docker you are behind the times. I’m sure this will be downvoted, but it needs to be said.

Doctor_Fegg 6y ago
No it doesn’t. There are several Mac-native apps, such as QGIS, for which Postgres is a sensible local datastore. Running it in a container for this is an entirely unnecessary complication.
jdboyd 6y ago
How does permeance compare? Also that doesn't look like a good option for M1 mac users.
slezyr 6y ago
> you are behind the times Seriously? What is wrong with running programs natively without any layers in between? Also, IIRC PostgreSQL isn't recommended to be run in docker due to a possible data loss?
- user-the-name 6y ago
  Because your average Unix program will basically spread itself all over your system, and is nearly impossible to remove. I don't want to pollute all my system directories with random gunk. Keeping things in containers keeps it from making a mess, and that alone makes it worth it, to say nothing about the advantages for handling dependencies or running multiple copies or versions.
  - Doctor_Fegg 6y ago
    The original issue is about Postgres.app which very deliberately _doesn’t_ spread itself all over your system.
  - cat199 6y ago
    your average unix program, esp. something like postgres which has been developed for literally decades, will basically spread itself into well defined compile-time locations which are easily removed by any competent package manager or even competent manual build (touch package.stamp && make install && find $prefix -cnewer -type f package.stamp > package.file-list ) It's only 'random' if you don't know what you are doing. Containers are fine and often good, but their existence/availability doesn't 'supercede' real knowledge.
cat199 6y ago
... alternately, if you think running in docker is suitable for and solves all problems, you are a noob.

sixbrx 6y ago

I wonder what happens if you volume mount your MacOS files into the container, then the Docker daemon (I guess) would still have to do an open() in MacOS that could get the EINTR. Does Docker process handle it properly?