-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 553
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
Add extra file descriptors to Process #100
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@mrunalp
This might be
ExtraFiles []*os.File
json:"extraFiles"``There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
since this is supposed to be a config that is serialized I highly doubt this will work at all
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@crosbymichael @philips This feature makes more sense as a dynamic property. We could have an environment variable passed to the runtime that could be a list of open fds that it should leak into the container process. For e.g.
WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what is your use case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@crosbymichael Systemd socket activated containers http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/socket-activated-containers.html
We could either make this generic or leave it out and have the runtimes support systemd environment variables for activation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i think having runtime support for
LISTEN_FDS
and doing passthrough would be better than adding this runtime information in the spec that is to be serialized.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:16:46AM -0700, Michael Crosby wrote:
You're still serializing those file descriptors into the environment
variable, no? With #88 and the LISTEN_FDS suggestion, that would mean
the runtime would have to check:
to figure out how to create the container and launch the application.
Personally, I see no problem with mutating a single config to launch
the container (so the runtime only has to look in one place) [1,2].
But if we do end up getting a second place to put any configuration
considered “too host-specific for config.json”, then I don't see a
need to go further than a runtime.json.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@wking no
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:25:04AM -0700, Michael Crosby wrote:
Then why not use environment variables for all runtime-specific
settings? If there is a need to use all of:
how do we make decisions about sorting between them? E.g. why use
LISTEN_FDS for passing file descriptors through and runtime.json to
pass namespace paths through?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@crosbymichael SGTM