-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
NOMERGE: Updates to Solr example #4
Conversation
image: solr:5.5 | ||
build: env/docker/solr | ||
ports: | ||
- "8983:8983" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The image should already be exporting the port just fine.
build: ./dockerfiles/solr_data | ||
volumes: | ||
- /data/solr_example/solr:/var/lib/solr | ||
- /data/outrigger/solr:/var/lib/solr |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The permission probably comes from this, based on how this is the major variation between what you have and what I've recently been using. This can inherit some directory level permissions of some sort from the source side.
Instead, we could define this as a named volume.
solr-data:/var/lib/solr
Then parallel to the services
key:
volumes:
# This data volume persists Solr storage.
# The search service is using a customized Docker image to facilitate write
# access to this volume.
# An empty value indicates all settings are default.
solr-data:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Marking this so status shows matching previous comments.
Is this approach here still best practice? Do we need to roll in some of the updated suggested above, or do we need to approach solr completely differently? I'm aware our existing example is out of date, so we really need to get this ironed out for good guidance from our team. |
@dnmurray was going to put together a solr image last we discussed this, then reduce the example here accordingly. |
This moves us from 2 containers for Solr down to 1.
Current problem is that the permissions changes in the Dockerfile don't seem to be doing the job, because when
docker-compose up
'ing, you get:Any thoughts on that? Or, is this approach just entirely wrong to begin with?