docker VS rancher

Everything is working fine, but it is not currently doing the automatic code reload. I tried mounting the volume but there is some conflict with the way docker and virtualbox handles files such that the conflict leads to file changes from the host not reflected in docker container. (That's not the first link I have that appears related to this problem, it's just the first I found while googling it on another day)...

github.com/docker/docker/client

Moby is the core of Docker. https://github.com/docker/docker redirects to it.

Docker however has made some major screwups in their IPv6 implementation, so it’s not so trivial as you’d expect it to be. There’s a whole discussion about it here: https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6075 but the gist is: Docker cannot auto-assign addresses (SLAAC) like a normal endpoint, it also cannot request a prefix (DHCPv6 PD) like a router, you have to set it all up manually.

[1] https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/5325

That said, Swarm is definitely in maintenance mode, which is actually how some people like it, given that this means pretty good stability for the current features, instead of breaking changes, which are a slightly larger concern in the case of Kubernetes. However, this also means that new features will get implemented only occasionally, if ever - the last big one that i recall was Swarm jobs. Essentially, i'd say that it's still just a question of time until Swarm dies, but for now it's in the sweet spot of stability and usability if all that you need is a pretty simple and lightweight orchestrator.

From scrounging through the internet, my understanding is if multiple docker containers are run based on the same image, the only extra disk space used is what the writable layer uses and the read-only image data is shared by all the containers. https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/1520#issuecomment-305179362

Wowww: https://github.com/docker/docker.github.io/issues/6910#issue...

What the hell does "Docker's new direction to go back to its roots and focus on developer tooling" even mean? Docker is developer tooling, that's the whole product. That's not "going back to your roots" that's just doing your damn job.

Did something happen to the Apache 2 rancher? https://github.com/rancher/rancher/blob/v2.7.5/LICENSE RKE2 is similarly Apache 2: https://github.com/rancher/rke2/blob/v1.26.7%2Brke2r1/LICENS...

I follow the 4 ABCD steps bellow, but the first pod deployment never ends. What's wrong in it? Logs and result screens are at the end. Detailed configuration can be found here.

CVE-2023-22651 is rated 9.9/10 : https://github.com/rancher/rancher/security/advisories/GHSA-6m9f-pj6w-w87g

Depends. When I came into my last company I immediately noticed the lack of reproducible environments. Brought this up a few times and was met with some resistance because "we didn't have the capacity"... Until prod went down and it took us 23 hours to bring it back up due to spaghetti terraform.

For the latest releases of rancher: https://github.com/rancher/rancher/releases When is Rancher 2.7.1 going to be released? The Rancher support matrix for 2.7.1 shows k8s v1.24.6 as the highest supported version and Azure will drop AKS v1.24 in a few months... Should this be a concern for us? What could happen if we create our cluster with Rancher for an unsupported K8s version? 1.25 for example. - Rancher 2.7.2 just got released including support for 1.25. I have however tested running unsupported versions before, unless there is major deprecations in the kubernetes API it is fine in my experience. If we move to AKS imported clusters, in case we add node pools, and upgrade the cluster, will those changes be reflected in the Rancher Platform? - Yep! If we face some issues by running an unsupported K8s version on Rancher Launched K8s clusters, is it possible to remove it from Rancher, do the stuff we need, and then import it into the platform? - Yes, however be careful and do testing before doing in prod. From top of mind: Remove cluster from rancher (if imported), if rancher created you might want to revoke ranchers SA key for the cluster first (so it can't remove it). Delete the cattle-system namespace, and any other cattle-* namespaces you don't want to keep. And do your thing. It looks like AKS is faster than Rancher regarding supported Kubernetes versions... We would like to know if Rancher will always be on track with AKS regarding the removal of K8s version support and new versions. - In my experience yes. (Been using rancher on all three clouds for a 4 years now). What are exactly the big differences between imported AKS and Rancher-launched AKS? What should we look at, and what issues can we face when using one or another? - The main difference is that rancher will not be able to upgrade the cluster for you. You will have to do that yourself.

variable "rancher" { type = object({ namespace = string version = string branch = string chart_set = list(object({ name = string value = string })) }) default = { namespace = "cattle-system" # There is a bug with destroying the cloud credentials in version 2.6.9 until 2.7.1 and will be fixed in next release 2.7.2. # See https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/39300 version = "2.7.0" branch = "stable" chart_set = [ { name = "replicas" value = 3 }, { name = "ingress.ingressClassName" value = "nginx-external" }, { name = "ingress.tls.source" value = "rancher" }, # There is a bug with the uninstallation of Rancher due to missing priorityClassName of rancher-webhook # The priorityClassName need to be set # See https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/40935 { name = "priorityClassName" value = "system-node-critical" } ] } description = "Rancher Helm chart properties." }

When I searched DuckDuckGo instead, the 12th link actually had the real answer. It's in this issue on Rancher's GitHub. Turns out the Rancher admin needs to be in all of the Keycloak groups they want to have show up in the auto-populated picklist in Rancher. Being a Keycloak admin and even creating the groups isn't good enough. Frustratingly, the "caveat" note the Rancher guy is pointing to that says this is only present in the guide to setting up Keycloak for SAML, but apparently this is also true for OIDC.

Explicitly set TLS 1.3 in Rancher, though it could be a bug in Rancher: https://github.com/rancher/rancher/issues/35654

Thanks. Yeah looks like this might work: https://github.com/rancher/rancher/releases/tag/v2.7.2-rc3