You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The way docker swarm works is it's fully robust for stateless services but not as much for stateful services. For stateful services (those that have mounted volumes), we need to take care of sharing data (can be done via docker plugins).
Describe the solution you'd like
It would be great if we could add in a setting that allows for state to be stored in the server or not. That way stateful services are not accidentally deployed when on swarm mode.
It can also come in as a user permission field, to allow state mount
Describe alternatives you've considered
Not using the volume feature would work, but I do think it'd be great if the admin can configure it to be unavailable for other user.
Additional context
No response
Will you send a PR to implement it?
No
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
ErSauravAdhikari
changed the title
Ability to configure forced stateful mode for swarm based deployment
Ability to configure forced stateless mode for swarm based deployment
Nov 30, 2024
What problem will this feature address?
The way docker swarm works is it's fully robust for stateless services but not as much for stateful services. For stateful services (those that have mounted volumes), we need to take care of sharing data (can be done via docker plugins).
Describe the solution you'd like
It would be great if we could add in a setting that allows for state to be stored in the server or not. That way stateful services are not accidentally deployed when on swarm mode.
It can also come in as a user permission field, to allow state mount
Describe alternatives you've considered
Not using the volume feature would work, but I do think it'd be great if the admin can configure it to be unavailable for other user.
Additional context
No response
Will you send a PR to implement it?
No
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: