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

Consolidate Docker Containers? #22

Open
Gandalf-the-Blue opened this issue Jan 4, 2025 · 3 comments
Open

Consolidate Docker Containers? #22

Gandalf-the-Blue opened this issue Jan 4, 2025 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Gandalf-the-Blue
Copy link

Hi,

Given the number of separate docker containers, it is quite daunting to deploy booklogr (I myself am holding out for now) - It might be a good idea to consolidate the docker containers into a more manageable number (ideally 2 maybe 3).
Thanks!

@Mozzo1000 Mozzo1000 added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 6, 2025
@Mozzo1000
Copy link
Owner

Hi,
Thank you so much for showing interest in this project!
I will have to think about this. From my perspective I thought best practice for containers are to separate each process into it's own container. Nonetheless, I agree on your point that 5 containers are a bit too much. And thinking about who the end user should be for this project I can only assume less containers would only do good.
The project is setup in a way that would allow many users to use the same service, but in retrospect I am not sure that is the ideal user for this kind of project.

At the moment I don't know how I would build a single image for the services, the web, api and worker should most likely be easiest to consolidate into one container. I will have to look into this further.

@McMumf
Copy link

McMumf commented Jan 11, 2025

At least for the auth perspective, it might be worth planning long-term support for those homelab-ers that already have an authentication solution (i.e. authentik or authelia).

This would remove one docker container from the things to manage.

My naive two cents :D

@Mozzo1000
Copy link
Owner

Thank you @McMumf for your input! I am not 100% sure how authentik or similar solutions would work to remove the need for the auth container. The API backend authenticates based on JWT tokens, I will still have to somehow issue tokens based on authentication against simple email/password or oauth endpoints.

However I am not familiar with authentik or similar solutions and will have to look into them further and not dismiss them as "only" a oauth provider.
Bringing your own authentication solution could still be a valuable addition to this project!

What I think I will do for now is rewrite the auth-server into a flask extension. This would remove the need for a separate container while still providing the same use case, mainly being not having to write authentication code for every single project I write and having copy-pasted code all over the place. I believe this would be a simple change.

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants