Portainer: Much Ado About Nothing

    • OMV 5.x (beta)
    • I was having a look at Cockpit. One thing I can't find (or maybe I'm missing it)... is a way to edit a current container. I can see my list of running containers, but my options are Start, Stop, Delete and Commit.

      Is there really no way to edit a container from Cockpit?
      Air Conditioners are a lot like PC's... They work great until you open Windows.

    • As it seems, editing a container is not allowed. But if a container is stopped, the Commit button uses the container as a template for a new Docker image, where a new container can be edited and ran using the new image as a source.

      While environment variables are saved with the commit button, it appears that volumes and bind points, and the restart policy, are not. I've had to recreate these items in each new container. (Unless I'm missing something.)

      The post was edited 1 time, last by crashtest: edit ().

    • crashtest wrote:

      where a new container can be edited and ran using the new image as a source.

      KM0201 wrote:

      I guess that works, but pretty clunky imo.
      That is cockpit's one shortcoming it's ability to edit/change a container.

      Of the two Portianer offers more in functionality, but IMO Cockpit is easier to use + if you use @TechnoDadLife videos you can follow these on both. The one downside to both is locating a host path, the plugin spoils you by showing a directory structure, whereas both Portainer and Cockpit require you to type in the path or one can use FTP to copy the path then paste into the host path.

      Container paths; with Portainer these have to be typed in, with Cockpit they are automatically added, in the plugin we type in / and see a list of the container paths that are required.

      There could be a case to install both, what if your Portainer container, after all that's what it is, stopped or became corrupt, Cockpit would offer a GUI to resolve the problem, otherwise you're back to the command line.

      Cockpits one biggest failing is that you have no idea if you are in host or bridge mode, there is no selection just a check box, it also appears that you are not able to add a MacVlan. Portainer on the other hand has the ability to create a MacVlan and to select the connection the container will use.

      They both have their own idiosyncrasies, Cockpit is easier to understand for a first time user of docker, Portainer will be more appealing to current users of docker.
      Raid is not a backup! Would you go skydiving without a parachute?
    • geaves wrote:

      crashtest wrote:

      where a new container can be edited and ran using the new image as a source.

      KM0201 wrote:

      I guess that works, but pretty clunky imo.
      That is cockpit's one shortcoming it's ability to edit/change a container.
      Of the two Portianer offers more in functionality, but IMO Cockpit is easier to use + if you use @TechnoDadLife videos you can follow these on both. The one downside to both is locating a host path, the plugin spoils you by showing a directory structure, whereas both Portainer and Cockpit require you to type in the path or one can use FTP to copy the path then paste into the host path.

      Container paths; with Portainer these have to be typed in, with Cockpit they are automatically added, in the plugin we type in / and see a list of the container paths that are required.

      There could be a case to install both, what if your Portainer container, after all that's what it is, stopped or became corrupt, Cockpit would offer a GUI to resolve the problem, otherwise you're back to the command line.

      Cockpits one biggest failing is that you have no idea if you are in host or bridge mode, there is no selection just a check box, it also appears that you are not able to add a MacVlan. Portainer on the other hand has the ability to create a MacVlan and to select the connection the container will use.

      They both have their own idiosyncrasies, Cockpit is easier to understand for a first time user of docker, Portainer will be more appealing to current users of docker.
      Obviously "ease of use" is in the eye of the user... maybe it's because I started with Portainer (and I admit I'm an extreme creature of habit).. but I like it better than cockpit. I think folks coming from the docker plugin in OMV... will probably find some similarities between it and Portainer
      Air Conditioners are a lot like PC's... They work great until you open Windows.

    • KM0201 wrote:

      Obviously "ease of use" is in the eye of the user
      I would agree and the only reason suggesting Cockpit, it's docker setup is less 'daunting' for a new first time user of docker. TBH there are still going to be questions about Portainer and Cockpit when OMV5 goes stable and I can understand why have a plugin when there is something out there that can do the same thing. Hence moving away from plugins to docker where there is a like for like usage.
      Raid is not a backup! Would you go skydiving without a parachute?
    • geaves wrote:

      KM0201 wrote:

      Obviously "ease of use" is in the eye of the user
      I would agree and the only reason suggesting Cockpit, it's docker setup is less 'daunting' for a new first time user of docker. TBH there are still going to be questions about Portainer and Cockpit when OMV5 goes stable and I can understand why have a plugin when there is something out there that can do the same thing. Hence moving away from plugins to docker where there is a like for like usage.
      Yep... I remember back when the project started (pre docker), it seemed like some users wanted a plugin to show them how to tie their shoes. I think a lot of it is there were just so many new to linux users back then.. and having plugins just made setting things up easier for them.
      Air Conditioners are a lot like PC's... They work great until you open Windows.

    • If people think portainer (or even cockpit) is too hard to setup, people could create docker-compose files that could put in portainer. They would just need the path(s) adjusted. I would think that would simpler than the plugin.
      omv 5.0.14 usul | 64 bit | 5.0 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.1.4
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      If people think portainer (or even cockpit) is too hard to setup, people could create docker-compose files that could put in portainer. They would just need the path(s) adjusted. I would think that would simpler than the plugin.
      I didn't see this asked before, but I am sure it was.

      Anyway to add the Open Portainer button under the services menu?

      It would also seem that we would want to change the mount point for the docker to a shared folder off the main drive. I would think that people with raspberry Pi's would fill up there sd cards fast.
      Build, Learn, Create.

      How to Videos for OMV

      Post any questions to the forum, so others can benefit from your curiosity. :thumbsup:
      No private support.
    • TechnoDadLife wrote:

      Anyway to add the Open Portainer button under the services menu?
      No. It would have to open just like any other plugin and have a button to open the web interface just like omv-extras does now.

      TechnoDadLife wrote:

      It would also seem that we would want to change the mount point for the docker to a shared folder off the main drive. I would think that people with raspberry Pi's would fill up there sd cards fast.
      That is why I added the Docker Storage text field in the docker install frame.
      omv 5.0.14 usul | 64 bit | 5.0 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.1.4
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      If people think portainer (or even cockpit) is too hard to setup, people could create docker-compose files that could put in portainer. They would just need the path(s) adjusted. I would think that would simpler than the plugin.
      It would make it even simpler if we use Environment variables with the example portainer compose files, rather than have them edit each container


      docker-compose example

      Source Code

      1. radarr:
      2. image: "linuxserver/radarr"
      3. hostname: omv
      4. container_name: "radarr"
      5. volumes:
      6. - ${USERDIR}/appdata/radarr:/config
      7. - ${USERDIR}/downloads:/downloads
      8. - ${USERDIR}/media/movies:/movies
      9. ports:
      10. - "7878:7878"
      11. restart: unless-stopped
      12. environment:
      13. - PUID=${PUID}
      14. - PGID=${PGID}
      15. - TZ=${TZ}
      Display All



      Environment variables example

      Source Code

      1. PUID=1000
      2. PGID=100
      3. TZ=Europe/London
      4. USERDIR=/sharedfolders/

      The post was edited 1 time, last by roison ().

    • geaves wrote:

      Cockpits one biggest failing is that you have no idea if you are in host or bridge mode, there is no selection just a check box, it also appears that you are not able to add a MacVlan. Portainer on the other hand has the ability to create a MacVlan and to select the connection the container will use.
      The only thing I see Cockpit as is an easy Terminal connection. I am not a VM guy, so I don't know anything about how good it is at that. It does have a handy Docker image finder/downloader function. When it comes to setting up containers Portainer is just fine.

      TechnoDadLife wrote:

      It would also seem that we would want to change the mount point for the docker to a shared folder off the main drive. I would think that people with raspberry Pi's would fill up there sd cards fast.
      Storing Dockers on a data drive has the added bonus of not having to download/setup images/containers from scratch when doing a clean install of omv. After installing, mounting the data drives, and then turning on Omv-extras/Docker/Portainer, all of the containers just work. I discovered this while moving my system install from an internal ssd to a USB thumb drive this morning. What a time/grief saver!
      Retired. I love to garden and mess with computers. The more I mess with both the less I know about either.
      OMV 4.1.27-1 on a pair of Odroid hc2's w/ 4TB WD Blue. Running Nextcloud, Plex, & Heimdall - and a Raspberry Pi 3 running Pi-hole.
      Testing OMV 5.0.14-1 beta on an Odroid H2, HP dx2400, and Nanopi M4.
    • chclark wrote:

      something new and confusing lol.
      It isn't that different. The concept of ports and volumes isn't changing. It just looks a little different and has a few more options.
      omv 5.0.14 usul | 64 bit | 5.0 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.1.4
      omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github

      Please read this before posting a question and this and this for docker questions.
      Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!
    • ryecoaaron wrote:

      chclark wrote:

      something new and confusing lol.
      It isn't that different. The concept of ports and volumes isn't changing. It just looks a little different and has a few more options.
      Agree... I think some folks are kinda making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is. If you're reasonably comfortable with the docker GUI on OMV 4... I can't speak much for cockpit as my experience with it is limited, but Portainer is extremely similar and once you get over that you're using a completely different GUI, you'll find setting up containers extremely similar to the docker plugin.
      Air Conditioners are a lot like PC's... They work great until you open Windows.

    • KM0201 wrote:

      Agree... I think some folks are kinda making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is.
      I'll go sit in the corner :)

      But seriously I agree there is a lot you do with Portianer, I ran docker system df this will give you information on docker -> Images, Containers, Local Volume, Build Cache including reclaimable space. The usual way to get back the reclaimable space is using the cli, but you can use use Portainer's interface to locate and then delete using the output from the above.
      Raid is not a backup! Would you go skydiving without a parachute?
    • KM0201 wrote:

      ryecoaaron wrote:

      chclark wrote:

      something new and confusing lol.
      It isn't that different. The concept of ports and volumes isn't changing. It just looks a little different and has a few more options.
      Agree... I think some folks are kinda making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is. If you're reasonably comfortable with the docker GUI on OMV 4... I can't speak much for cockpit as my experience with it is limited, but Portainer is extremely similar and once you get over that you're using a completely different GUI, you'll find setting up containers extremely similar to the docker plugin.
      ok so I spun a new VM up of omv5 and could get this working and some containers set up it wasn't so bad. Main think will be working out when it comes to it how to port my current config over I used the guide that was originally made in the guides section.

      One thing I didn't like with portainer was how I was so easily able to accidently stop or delete the portainer container with in the gui (which I did some how thinking I was deleting the unifi test container).

      Btw just got to say technodadlife spent some time watching your videos yesterday. Very nice useful vids look forward to more and hopefully one explaining the transition to portainer when omv5 goes live.
      OMV 3.0.58 - 64 bit - Nut, SABnzbd, Sonarr, Couchpotato
      HP N40L Microserver, 8gb Ram, 5 x 3TB HDD Raid5, 1 x 120GB 2.5" SSD (OS)
    • geaves wrote:

      KM0201 wrote:

      Agree... I think some folks are kinda making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is.
      I'll go sit in the corner :)
      But seriously I agree there is a lot you do with Portianer, I ran docker system df this will give you information on docker -> Images, Containers, Local Volume, Build Cache including reclaimable space. The usual way to get back the reclaimable space is using the cli, but you can use use Portainer's interface to locate and then delete using the output from the above.
      LOL... Unless I've missed something, I don't really put you in that camp. You just seem to prefer Cockpit to Portainer... which is just a matter to preference. I'm more referring to people who seem to think losing the docker plugin (as we knew it in omv 4) is a big deal and is the end off docker on OMV. I've actually had people on another forum tell me they didn't want to upgrade because of this, which I think is just foolish.. I think once folks take a breath, and then take a few minutes to learn either Cockpit or Portainer, they're probably going to find that the docker plugin in omv 4 has laid a pretty good foundation for them to to use and have a reasonable understanding of these two new tools (or at least I found that with Portainer).

      Like I said, it's really just much ado about nothing, IMO.
      Air Conditioners are a lot like PC's... They work great until you open Windows.

    • chclark wrote:

      KM0201 wrote:

      ryecoaaron wrote:

      chclark wrote:

      something new and confusing lol.
      It isn't that different. The concept of ports and volumes isn't changing. It just looks a little different and has a few more options.
      Agree... I think some folks are kinda making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is. If you're reasonably comfortable with the docker GUI on OMV 4... I can't speak much for cockpit as my experience with it is limited, but Portainer is extremely similar and once you get over that you're using a completely different GUI, you'll find setting up containers extremely similar to the docker plugin.
      ok so I spun a new VM up of omv5 and could get this working and some containers set up it wasn't so bad. Main think will be working out when it comes to it how to port my current config over I used the guide that was originally made in the guides section.
      One thing I didn't like with portainer was how I was so easily able to accidently stop or delete the portainer container with in the gui (which I did some how thinking I was deleting the unifi test container).

      Btw just got to say technodadlife spent some time watching your videos yesterday. Very nice useful vids look forward to more and hopefully one explaining the transition to portainer when omv5 goes live.
      I didn't even realize that was possible so just for grins, I just did it.... Surprised me to be honest.
      Air Conditioners are a lot like PC's... They work great until you open Windows.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by KM0201 ().

    • KM0201 wrote:

      chclark wrote:

      KM0201 wrote:

      ryecoaaron wrote:

      chclark wrote:

      something new and confusing lol.
      It isn't that different. The concept of ports and volumes isn't changing. It just looks a little different and has a few more options.
      Agree... I think some folks are kinda making a bigger deal out of this than it actually is. If you're reasonably comfortable with the docker GUI on OMV 4... I can't speak much for cockpit as my experience with it is limited, but Portainer is extremely similar and once you get over that you're using a completely different GUI, you'll find setting up containers extremely similar to the docker plugin.
      ok so I spun a new VM up of omv5 and could get this working and some containers set up it wasn't so bad. Main think will be working out when it comes to it how to port my current config over I used the guide that was originally made in the guides section.One thing I didn't like with portainer was how I was so easily able to accidently stop or delete the portainer container with in the gui (which I did some how thinking I was deleting the unifi test container).

      Btw just got to say technodadlife spent some time watching your videos yesterday. Very nice useful vids look forward to more and hopefully one explaining the transition to portainer when omv5 goes live.
      I didn't even realize that was possible so just for grins, I just did it.... Surprised me to be honest.
      I didn't think it would be either. Easily recovered just by telling it to reinstall portainer in the omv extras section just abit odd it's possible you'd think it would be protected from deleting itself.

      I think some of the problem people have including myself with the change is that it's a change and that's the problem is there doesn't feel a set way going forward for how omv is going to do it. One minute it's plugins next it's docker GUI, now it's going either portainer or cockpit. I'd prefer it if there was a set way omv moved forward with this, I haven't tired other Nas os I've stuck loyal with omv but surely they don't all change the way they get users to use/manage apps each version?

      Hope that makes sense and isn't an attack at anyone so please don't feel that it is.
      OMV 3.0.58 - 64 bit - Nut, SABnzbd, Sonarr, Couchpotato
      HP N40L Microserver, 8gb Ram, 5 x 3TB HDD Raid5, 1 x 120GB 2.5" SSD (OS)