You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? If so, please describe the problem:
When installing / using augur with docker -- the postgres database is tied directly to the data within the encircling container. As containers / drives sometimes fail -- this is a brittle way to set up the database that may hold 100's of thousands of repositories worth of valuable metadata.
Potential solutions:
mount a volume into the postgres docker image that could be mounted from a volume, eventually put in a redundant filesystem / nfs mount or standard backup mount on a cloud instance.
From their documentation the mount would be associated with a respective PGDATA environment variable to avoid unexpected behavior.
Is your feature request related to a problem? If so, please describe the problem:
When installing / using augur with docker -- the postgres database is tied directly to the data within the encircling container. As containers / drives sometimes fail -- this is a brittle way to set up the database that may hold 100's of thousands of repositories worth of valuable metadata.
Potential solutions:
mount a volume into the postgres docker image that could be mounted from a volume, eventually put in a redundant filesystem / nfs mount or standard backup mount on a cloud instance.
From their documentation the mount would be associated with a respective
PGDATA
environment variable to avoid unexpected behavior.This allows a decoupled volume to exist regardless of containers being started/restarted/removed/recreated.
Additional context:
postgres docker image
I'm happy to work on this, just wanted to see the interest or if there's a good reason not to include the data in a volume!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: