Skip to content
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

Use of named volumes #7

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Use of named volumes #7

wants to merge 10 commits into from

Conversation

victorjss
Copy link

@victorjss victorjss commented Oct 2, 2019

I updated this project for my own use, and I prefer using named volumes because of they are less problematic with UIDs, are "file path separator aware" when using absolute paths and allow easier backup management. Named volumes also allow initial container content to be added to this folders, meanwhile host volumes force to add all need required content in local path (because of that Solr6 logs cannot be accessed in original version of this project).

The main disadvantage is the need of use of gdiepen/volume-sharer, or similar one, to access file in volumes (at least in Windows, in Linux could be accessed directly in /var/lib/docker/volumes but the problems with UIDs would appear using this direct path).

README.md was updated to show these changes, but my English needs a peer-review.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant