The article seems to mention problems with AUFS, overlay and possibly overlay2 as well. However one of the things that i haven't quite understood, is why peopl

The article seems to mention problems with AUFS, overlay and possibly overlay2 as well. However one of the things that i haven't quite understood, is why people use Docker volumes that much in the first place, or even think that they need to use additional volume plugins in most deployments? If it's a relatively simple deployment, that has some persistent data and it's clear on which nodes the containers could be scheduled (either by label or by hostname), what would prevent someone from just using bind mounts ( https://docs.docker.com/storage/bind-mounts/ https://docs.docker.com/storage/bind-mounts/ )? And if you need to store it on a separate machine, why not just use NFS on the host OS to mount the directory which you will bind mount? Or, alternatively, why not just use GlusterFS or Ceph for that sort of stuff, instead of making Docker attempt to manage it? For example, Docker Swarm fails to launch containers if the bind mount path doesn't exist, but that bit can also be addressed by creating the necessary directory structure with something like Ansible - and then you're not only able to not worry about volumes and the risk of them ever becoming corrupt, but you also have the ability to inspect the contents of the container storage on the actual host. Say, if there are some configuration files that need altering (seeing as not all of the containerized software out there follows 12 Factor principles with environment configuration either), or you just want to do some backups for the data that you've stored in a granular fashion.