Selfhosted

39435 readers

10 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Are you reusing one postgres instance for all services? (jemmy.jeena.net)

submitted 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

42 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I have many services running on my server and about half of them use postgres. As long as I installed them manually I would always create a new database and reuse the same postgres instance for each service, which seems to me quite logical. The least amount of overhead, fast boot, etc.

But since I started to use docker, most of the docker-compose files come with their own instance of postgres. Until now I just let them do it and were running a couple of instances of postgres. But it's kind of getting rediciolous how many postgres instances I run on one server.

Do you guys run several dockerized instances of postgres or do you rewrite the docker compose files to give access to your one central postgres instance? And are there usually any problems with that like version incompatibilities, etc.?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This is one of the annoying issues with docker, or better, on how docker is abused in production.

The single instance/multiple databases is the correct way to go, docker approach mess up with that.

Rewriting docker files is always a possibility but honestly defies the reason why docker is used by self hosters.

Also beware that some devs will shunt you out of support if you do, specially the apps that ships docker files by default.

Go bare metal if possible, that way you have full control. Do docker for testing up stuff quickly and be flexible at cost of accepting how stuff is packaged by upstream

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

The official Postgres Docker image is geared towards single database per instance for several reasons - security through isolation and the ability to run different versions easily on the same server chief among them. The performance overhead is negligible.

And about devs not supporting custom installation methods, I'm more inclined to think it's for lack of time to support every individual native setup and just responding to tickets about their official one (which also is why Docker exists in the first place).