I'm using docker python SDK docker-py, which is quite convenient. I look through the document, I still can't figure out how to create a daemon container with interface terminal,that is to say, if in the shell, this equals to the command docker run -dit image.
I know docker-py right now offers the client.containers.run to run a contaniner, and with deatch argument I can run it as a daemon. However, I want start it with a interface terminal.
'Cause my further code would access to the container from the remote server. Is there any way to create it directly with docker-py instead of using os.system(docker run -dit image)?
After swimming in the doc for a while, I figure it out.
The command docker run -dit image in docker-py is client.containers.run(image,tty=True,stdin_open=True, detach=True) This would work. Thank u David.
Related
It's been asked before but I haven't been able to find the answer so far. I have a script which is called via a Flask app. It's Dockerized and I used docker-compose.yml. The docker command, which worked outside of Docker, creates a html file using openscad. As you can see below, it takes a variable path:
cmd_args = f"docker run -v '{path}':/documents/ --rm --name manual-asciidoc-to-html " \
f"asciidoctor/docker-asciidoctor asciidoctor -D /documents *.adoc"
Popen(cmd_args, shell=True)
time.sleep(1)
When the script executes, the print out in Terminal shows:
myapp | /bin/sh: 1: docker: not found
How can I get this docker command to run in my already running docker container?
I don’t really get what you are trying to say here but I‘m assuming you want to run the docker command from within your container. You don’t really do it that way. The way to communicate with the docker daemon from within a container is to add the Docker Unix socket from the host system to the container using the -v when starting the container or adding it to the volumes section of your docker-compose:
volumes:
- /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock
After doing that you should be able to use a docker API (https://github.com/docker/docker-py) to connect to the Daemon from within the container and do the actions you want to. You should be able to convert the command you initially wanted to execute to simple docker API calls.
Regards
Dominik
I am starting to get a hand on docker and try to containerized some of the applications I use. Thanks to the tutorial I was able to create docker images and containers but now I am trying to thing about the most efficient and practical ways to do things.
To present my use-case, I have a python code (let's call it process.py) that takes as an input a single .jpg image, does some operations on this image, and then output the processed .jpg image.
Normally I would run it through :
python process.py -i path_of_the_input_image -o path_of_the_output_image
Then, the way I do the connection input/output with my docker is the following. First I create the docker file :
FROM python:3.6.8
COPY . /app
WORKDIR /app
RUN pip install --upgrade pip
RUN pip install -r requirements.txt
CMD python ./process.py -i ./input_output/input.jpg -o ./input_output/output.jpg
And then after building the image, I run docker run mapping the a local folder with the input_output folder of docker:
docker run -v C:/local_folder/:/app/input_output my_docker_image
This seems to work, but is not really practical, as I have to create locally a specific folder to mount it to the docker container. So here are the questions I am asking myself :
Is there a more practical ways of doings things ? To directly send one single input file and directly receive one single output files from the output of a docker container ?
When I run the docker image, what happens (If I understand correctly) is that it will create a docker container that will run my program once process.py once and then just sits there doing nothing. Even after finishing running process.py it will still be there listed in the command "docker ps -a". Is this behaviour expected ? Is there a way to automatically delete finished container ? Am I using docker run the right way ?
Is there a more practical way of having a container running continuously and on which I can query to run the program process.py on demand with a given input ?
I have a python code (let's call it process.py) that takes as an input a single .jpg image, does some operations on this image, and then output the processed .jpg image.
That's most efficiently done without Docker; just run the python command you already have. If your application has interesting Python library dependencies, you can install them in a virtual environment to avoid conflicts with the system Python installation.
When I run the Docker image...
...the container runs its main command (docker run command arguments, Dockerfile CMD, possibly combined with an entrypoint from the some sources), and when that command exits, the container exits. It will be listed in docker ps -a output, but as "Stopped" (probably with status 0 for a successful completion). You can docker run --rm to have the container automatically delete itself.
Is there a more practical way of having a container running continuously and on which I can query to run the program process.py on demand with a given input ?
Wrap it in a network service, like a Flask application. As long as this is running, you can use a tool like curl to do an HTTP POST with the input JPEG file as the body, and get the output JPEG file as the response. Avoid using local files and Docker together whenever that's an option (prefer network I/O for process inputs and outputs; prefer a database to local-file storage).
Why are volume mounts not practical?
I would argue that Dockerising your application is not practical, but you've chosen to do so for, presumably very good, reasons. Volume mounts are simply an extension to this. If you want to get data in/out of your container, the 'normal' way to do this is by using volume mounts as you have done. Sure, you could use docker cp to copy the files manually, but that's not really practical either.
As far as the process exiting goes, normally, once the main process exits, the container exits. docker ps -a shows stopped containers as well as running ones. You should see that it says Exited n minutes(hours, days etc) ago. This means that your container has run and exited, correctly. You can remove it with docker rm <containerid>.
docker ps (no -a) will only show the running ones, btw.
If you use the --rm flag in your Docker run command, it will be removed when it exits, so you won't see it in the ps -a output. Stopped containers can be started again, but that's rather unusual.
Another solution might be to change your script to wait for incoming files and process them as they are received. Then you can leave the container running, and it will just process them as needed. If doing this, make sure that your idle loop has a sleep or something in it to ensure that you don't consume too many resources.
I'm working on a project with python where I want to automate docker containers creation. I have the project folder already with includes all the files required to create the image.
One of these is create_image.sh
docker build -t my_container:latest .
Currently I do:
sudo bash create_image.sh
But now I need to automate this process from python.
I have tried:
import os
import subprocess
subprocess.check_call("bash -c '. create_image.sh'", shell=True)
But I get this error:
CalledProcessError: Command 'bash -c '. create_image.sh'' returned non-zero exit status 1.
EDIT:
The use case is to automate containers creation through an API, I have the code in flask and python until this point, where I got stuck in the images creation from the docker file. The rest is automated from templates.
You can try:
subprocess.call(['sudo', 'bash', 'create_image.sh' ])
which is equivalent of
sudo bash create_image.sh
Note: Let me say that there are better ways of automating docker container creation - please check docker-compose which can build and start the container easily. If you can elaborate more on the use case, we could help you with an elegant solution for docker. It might not be a python problem
EDIT:
Following the comments, it would be better to create a docker-compose and makefile is used to issue docker commands. Inspiration - https://medium.com/#daniel.carlier/how-to-build-a-simple-flask-restful-api-with-docker-compose-2d849d738137
In case that's because your user can't run docker without sudo, probably it's better to grant him docker API access by including him to docker group: https://askubuntu.com/questions/477551/how-can-i-use-docker-without-sudo
Simply adding user to docker group:
sudo gpasswd -a $USER docker
Also if You want to automate docker operations on python, I'd recommend to use python library for docker: How to build an Image using Docker API Python Client?
I have built a base image from Dockerfile named centos+ssh. In centos+ssh's Dockerfile, I use CMD to run ssh service.
Then I want to build a image run other service named rabbitmq,the Dockerfile:
FROM centos+ssh
EXPOSE 22
EXPOSE 4149
CMD /opt/mq/sbin/rabbitmq-server start
To start rabbitmq container，run：
docker run -d -p 222:22 -p 4149:4149 rabbitmq
but ssh service doesn't work, it sense rabbitmq's Dockerfile CMD override centos's CMD.
How does CMD work inside docker image?
If I want to run multiple service, how to? Using supervisor?
You are right, the second Dockerfile will overwrite the CMD command of the first one. Docker will always run a single command, not more. So at the end of your Dockerfile, you can specify one command to run. Not more.
But you can execute both commands in one line:
FROM centos+ssh
EXPOSE 22
EXPOSE 4149
CMD service sshd start && /opt/mq/sbin/rabbitmq-server start
What you could also do to make your Dockerfile a little bit cleaner, you could put your CMD commands to an extra file:
FROM centos+ssh
EXPOSE 22
EXPOSE 4149
CMD sh /home/centos/all_your_commands.sh
And a file like this:
service sshd start &
/opt/mq/sbin/rabbitmq-server start
Even though CMD is written down in the Dockerfile, it really is runtime information. Just like EXPOSE, but contrary to e.g. RUN and ADD. By this, I mean that you can override it later, in an extending Dockerfile, or simple in your run command, which is what you are experiencing. At all times, there can be only one CMD.
If you want to run multiple services, I indeed would use supervisor. You can make a supervisor configuration file for each service, ADD these in a directory, and run the supervisor with supervisord -c /etc/supervisor to point to a supervisor configuration file which loads all your services and looks like
[supervisord]
nodaemon=true
[include]
files = /etc/supervisor/conf.d/*.conf
If you would like more details, I wrote a blog on this subject here: http://blog.trifork.com/2014/03/11/using-supervisor-with-docker-to-manage-processes-supporting-image-inheritance/
While I respect the answer from qkrijger explaining how you can work around this issue I think there is a lot more we can learn about what's going on here ...
To actually answer your question of "why" ... I think it would for helpful for you to understand how the docker stop command works and that all processes should be shutdown cleanly to prevent problems when you try to restart them (file corruption etc).
Problem: What if docker did start SSH from it's command and started RabbitMQ from your Docker file? "The docker stop command attempts to stop a running container first by sending a SIGTERM signal to the root process (PID 1) in the container." Which process is docker tracking as PID 1 that will get the SIGTERM? Will it be SSH or Rabbit?? "According to the Unix process model, the init process -- PID 1 -- inherits all orphaned child processes and must reap them. Most Docker containers do not have an init process that does this correctly, and as a result their containers become filled with zombie processes over time."
Answer: Docker simply takes that last CMD as the one that will get launched as the root process with PID 1 and get the SIGTERM from docker stop.
Suggested solution: You should use (or create) a base image specifically made for running more than one service, such as phusion/baseimage
It should be important to note that tini exists exactly for this reason, and as of Docker 1.13 and up, tini is officially part of Docker, which tells us that running more than one process in Docker IS VALID .. so even if someone claims to be more skilled regarding Docker, and insists that you absurd for thinking of doing this, know that you are not. There are perfectly valid situations for doing so.
Good to know:
https://blog.phusion.nl/2015/01/20/docker-and-the-pid-1-zombie-reaping-problem/
http://www.techbar.me/stopping-docker-containers-gracefully/
https://www.ctl.io/developers/blog/post/gracefully-stopping-docker-containers/
https://github.com/phusion/baseimage-docker#docker_single_process
The official docker answer to Run multiple services in a container.
It explains how you can do it with an init system (systemd, sysvinit, upstart) , a script (CMD ./my_wrapper_script.sh) or a supervisor like supervisord.
The && workaround can work only for services that starts in background (daemons) or that will execute quickly without interaction and release the prompt. Doing this with an interactive service (that keeps the prompt) and only the first service will start.
To address why CMD is designed to run only one service per container, let's just realize what would happen if the secondary servers run in the same container are not trivial / auxiliary but "major" (e.g. storage bundled with the frontend app). For starters, it would break down several important containerization features such as horizontal (auto-)scaling and rescheduling between nodes, both of which assume there is only one application (source of CPU load) per container. Then there is the issue of vulnerabilities - more servers exposed in a container means more frequent patching of CVEs...
So let's admit that it is a 'nudge' from Docker (and Kubernetes/Openshift) designers towards good practices and we should not reinvent workarounds (SSH is not necessary - we have docker exec / kubectl exec / oc rsh designed to replace it).
More info
https://devops.stackexchange.com/questions/447/why-it-is-recommended-to-run-only-one-process-in-a-container
From this post I found out that I can detach from a docker container with the sequence Ctrl+p + Ctrl+q.
I was wondering, is it possible to create a single bash (or python, or whatever) script that enters a docker container, runs a few commands, then uses the escape sequence to exit the container? I think it may not be possible, but please confirm/deny this!
docker exec --detach (or -d) should run commands without attaching.