Rant! 100GB Log file in Nextcloud.
I set it to debug at somepoint and forgot maybe? Idk, but why the heck does the default config of the official Docker is to keep all logs, forever, in a single file woth no rotation?
Feels like 101 of log files. Anyway, this explains why my storage recipt grew slowly but unexpectedly.
You're viewing a single thread.
Imho it’s because docker does away with (abstracts?) many years of sane system administration principles (like managing logfile rotations) that you are used to when you deploy bare metal on a Debian box. It’s a brave new world.
I disagree with this, container runtimes are a software like all others where logging needs to be configured. You can do so in the config of the container runtime environment.
Containers actually make this significantly easier because you only need to configure it once and it will be applied to all containers.
You are right and as others have pointed out correctly it’s Nextcloud not handling logging correctly in a containerized environment. I was ranting more about my dislike of containers in general, even though I use the technology (correctly) myself. It’s because I am already old on the scale of technology timelines.
Or you can forward to your system logger, like syslog or systemd.
But then projects like NextCloud do it all wrong by using a file. Just log to stdout and I'll manage the rest.
It's because with docker you don't need to do log files. Logging should be to stdout, and you let the host, orchestration framework, or whoever is running the container so logs however they want to. The container should not be writing log files in the first place, containers should be immutable except for core application logic.
At worst it saves in the config folder/volume where persistent stuff should be.
Docker stores that stdout per default in a log file in var/lib/docker/containers/...
You can configure the default or override per service. This isn't something containers should be doing.
Good point!
Or you can use Podman, which integrates nicely with Systemd and also utilizes all the regular system means to deal with log files and so on.
Does podman do the Docker networking thing where I can link containers together without exposing ports to the rest of the system? I like my docker compose setup where I only expose caddy (TLS trunking) and Jellyfin (because my TV fails connecting w/ TLS).
I think it also has that, but normally it uses an even easier concept of pods that basically wrap multiple containers into a meta container with it's own internal networking and name space, and that does exactly what you want.
Nice! I've been having permissions conflicts between Samba (installed system-wide) and Jellyfin (docker), so it's probably as good a time as any to try out podman since I need to mess with things anyway.
Good suggestion, although I do feel it always comes back to this “many ways to do kind of the same thing” that surrounds the Linux ecosystem. Docker, podman, … some claim it’s better, I hear others say it’s not 100% compatible all the time. My point being more fragmentation.
100 ways to configure a static ip.
Why does it need that? At least one per distro controlled by the distro-maintainers.
There's basically three types of networking config:
I do the last one because it's distro-agnostic. I use Network Manager and it works fine.
I notice that you replied to me once again in connection to me mentioning static IP and linux.
Can I summon you this way?
Apparently. I was wondering if you were the same person.
I'm just a happy Linux user trying to help when other people run into problems.
Totally okay. Hope it helps somone trying to search for solutions on th web :)