containers VS failure

There are multiple benefits of using the images from Bitnami. We can refer to their github repo for additional details. The Bitnami image from cassandra provides us the option to override few of the configurations in the cassandra.yaml file by passing the values as environment variables. For eg: When we provide an environment variable - CASSANDRA_CLUSTER_NAME – to the container, the value of this variable gets updated in the cassandra.yaml -> cluster_name field.

Have a look at the postgresql readme file to see the value they add: https://github.com/bitnami/containers/tree/main/bitnami/post...

When you use a bunch of different containers from Bitnami, you'll start to notice common configuration patterns which make managing the containers easier.

On the flipside, the additional configuration sometimes contradicts to the official documentation, so that can add complexity from time to time.

https://github.com/bitnami/containers https://bitnami.com/stack/mariadb/containers

git clone https://github.com/bitnami/containers.git cd bitnami/APP/VERSION/OPERATING-SYSTEM

mongodb 15:53:35.21 INFO ==> ** Starting MongoDB ** mongodb 15:54:35.83 mongodb 15:54:35.83 Welcome to the Bitnami mongodb container mongodb 15:54:35.83 Subscribe to project updates by watching https://github.com/bitnami/containers mongodb 15:54:35.83 Submit issues and feature requests at https://github.com/bitnami/containers/issues mongodb 15:54:35.83 mongodb 15:54:35.83 INFO ==> ** Starting MongoDB setup ** mongodb 15:54:35.85 INFO ==> Validating settings in MONGODB_* env vars... mongodb 15:54:36.08 WARN ==> You set the environment variable ALLOW_EMPTY_PASSWORD=yes. For safety reasons, do not use this flag in a production environment. mongodb 15:54:36.09 INFO ==> Initializing MongoDB... mongodb 15:54:36.13 INFO ==> Deploying MongoDB with persisted data... mongodb 15:54:36.15 INFO ==> ** MongoDB setup finished! ** mongodb 15:54:36.16 INFO ==> ** Starting MongoDB **

Is the chart pulling in the default bitnami/wordpress container?

I can't comment on ARM because all of my workloads are x86, but the Bitnami containers are almost always a good bet: https://bitnami.com/stacks/containers

Currently I build all of my language runtime containers myself (such as Java, Python, .NET, Node and so on) for the sake of simplicity and common tools, but when I'm dealing with something more complex to configure or turnkey software (think along the lines of Keycloak, MinIO, RabbitMQ, Redis, as well as databases like MariaDB or PostgreSQL), then I often just go with what Bitnami is offering. Here's their GitHub with a bit more information about why someone might use their images: https://github.com/bitnami/containers

Of course, do have a look at their instructions, because in the case of some of their images there can be some differences from the alternatives, for example: https://blog.kronis.dev/everything%20is%20broken/bitnami-mar... (in short, the official MariaDB image uses "/var/lib/mysql" and Bitnami MariaDB image uses "/bitnami/mariadb" for persistence; that tripped me up)

this is nice but it's not the one https://github.com/bitnami/containers/tree/main/bitnami but need to look at them more, thanks

Looks like it was superceeded by failure, which was later deprecated in favor of thiserror and anyhow

> It's not like there's likely hidden segfaults or memory vulns waiting there…

It's funny you mention that, because the now-deprecated 'failure' crate has such a memory-safety vulnerability: https://github.com/rust-lang-deprecated/failure/issues/336

Granted, consuming code is only vulnerable if they opt-in to implementing a provided trait method that most people should never ever need to implement. But I would still try to eliminate 'failure' from my dependency graph if possible (and I recently submitted PRs to two dependencies I was using to remove 'failure' from _their_ dependencies).

The Rust way. And then deprecate just before 1.0. Crying in failure crate