Permissions were a pain to get right for my volumes and data I migrated. Other than that, It’s really not that complicated, it was just a case of covering my compose files to systemd service files and starting the update timer.

It’s a function of a “pod” within podman.

I wrote the podman examples for AudioMuseAI using a pod: https://github.com/NeptuneHub/AudioMuse-AI/tree/main/deployment/podman-quadlets

And I have an example *arr suite on my GitHub page: https://github.com/K3CAN/podman-arr-quadlets

I’ve used FluxCD in the past and have looked into ArgoCD, but honestly, I’ve not seen any big benefit from either to be honest. I use k8s both at home and at work, and in both cases, we do “imperative” deploys: you run helm install ... either directly or via the CI and stuff is deployed.

So for example at my last job, our GitLab CI just had a section triggered exclusively for merges into master that ran helm install ... for all three environments. We had three values.yaml files, one for each environment, and when we wanted to deploy a new version, the process was:

1. Create a tag for our release version (ie. 1.2.3) and push it to the repo. This would trigger a build and push the resulting image into the container registry.
2. Push an update to the repo with the new tag set in the appropriate Helm values file. If we wanted to deploy 1.2.3 to development but not yet to staging or production, then the tag: value in each of the environment files would look like this:

• k8s/chart/environments/development.yaml: tag: 1.2.3
• k8s/chart/environments/staging.yaml: tag: 1.2.2
• k8s/chart/environments/production.yaml: tag: 1.2.2

Once that change is pushed, the CI will automatically apply it with helm install ... and make sure that all three environments are what they’re supposed to be.

As for dependent services, that should all be in your Helm chart so they’re stood up and torn down together. The specific case you mention about “Service A” being dependent on “Service B” but stood up before “Service B” is ready is a classic problem, but easily solved:

The dependent service (“A” in this case) should have an entrypoint that checks for everything else before starting. Here’s what I’m using right now in a project:

#!/bin/sh

while ! nc -z postgres 5432; do
  echo "Waiting for postgres..."
  sleep 0.1
done
echo "PostgreSQL started"

touch /tmp/ready

exec "$@"

I’ve even got some code that checks that all the Django migrations have run first for the same situation. The Kubernetes philosophy is that any container should be able to die at any time and be eventually be brought back up and that every container needs to be prepared for this. Typically this means that your containers should operate on the basis of “if I can’t work, die, and hope the problem is solved by the time Kubernetes redeploys me”.

Generally my suggestion is if you use kubernetes at work or want to learn it, self host that way to learn. If not don’t add all the complexity and use docker, docker compose, podman, etc. Kubetnetes is overkill for 90% of the use xases Ost companies have but here we are.

I concur with the other user: the logs are much easier to access and organized. The compact feel is much more suited to my preference.

I just recently switched from portainer to dockhand and I really like it. The UI is great and the setup and config wasn’t too complicated. I like that I can put both of my servers into one instance and can update all of my containers from dockhand vs manually. The other thing I like is being able to view the logs for my containers. Idk if it’s a me thing, but whenever I would try to view logs in portainer I would never be able to scroll up as it would update and send me back to the bottom. Again, I could’ve just been doing something wrong, but it always bothered me and I don’t have that issue with dockhand.

Well, I use it but it’s not directly what I think you are asking about.

I just use Proxmox (hypervisor) to run vm/lxc which run docker - and I just have backup images of those.

It has pros & cons but it’s not a docker backup, it’s just that by chance it’s ok for the little use I need it.

I would go for one of the other recommended solutions but perhaps consider a Proxmox layer underneath if you wanna a full image backup of the server itself.

I like the fact that there isn’t a distinction between the community edition and the business edition. Its all the same thing for Komodo, whereas I felt like Portainer had a bunc hof random things locked away behind the “Business Edition” and that just rubbed me the wrong way. If I’m self hosting something, I feel like I should be able to access all portions of it. The GUI is a little different but once you’re used to it, I feel like it makes more sense for the most part. It has a nice way to connect other machines, so I can monitor all of the different machines in my network that are hosting things. I also wanted to mess around with some of the automation features, but I haven’t had as much time to dick around with that as I would like. I also wanted to start doing stuff from a personal Forgejo, and it was super easy to integrate. (No idea how easy it is on Portainer, as I had already jumped ship at that point)

Honestly, not entirely certain I did it right, but it was super easy. I literally spun up Komodo, spun down Portainer without shutting any of the other containers/stacks down, then added the same stacks back through the GUI option into Komodo with the same exact compose/title/env options. It literally just recognized that the containers that were already running on my server were the correct ones and “added” them back to the stack in Komodo. I vaguely remember reading that there is a more “correct” way to do it, but I only read about it after the fact.