Skip to content
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

clean docker compose file #119

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 20, 2024
Merged

clean docker compose file #119

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 20, 2024

Conversation

Tianhao-Gu
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 20, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 41.94%. Comparing base (32d4d87) to head (61777de).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #119   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   41.94%   41.94%           
=======================================
  Files           7        7           
  Lines         503      503           
=======================================
  Hits          211      211           
  Misses        292      292           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.


🚨 Try these New Features:

Comment on lines -62 to -63
depends_on:
- spark-master
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems like it'd be necessary? Does it not matter?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It really doesn't matter now. I think at one time we might even remove stand alone spark. It slows down docker compose up/down. I can add it back but I think it's okay to leave it out.

ports:
- "4043:4043"
depends_on:
- spark-master
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same question here. Seems like it should also depend on yarn

@@ -231,6 +160,7 @@ services:
- NETWORK_NAME=cdm-jupyterhub-network
- JUPYTERHUB_USER_IMAGE=cdm-jupyterhub-cdm_jupyterhub:latest
- JUPYTERHUB_MOUNT_BASE_DIR=/cdr/cdm/jupyter
- ENVIRONMENT=dev
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there no user hub instance?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

no. Just one hub instance and permissions are controlled via user groups.

Copy link
Member

@MrCreosote MrCreosote Nov 20, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What does the ENVIRONMENT variable do in that case?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'd probably give that env var a more descriptive name in that case, like REMOVE_CONTAINER or something

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's okay. I might need this env var to differentiate between the production and test environments for other purposes. There are already so many env vars.

@Tianhao-Gu Tianhao-Gu merged commit 1c3b043 into main Nov 20, 2024
9 of 10 checks passed
@Tianhao-Gu Tianhao-Gu deleted the dev_jupyterhub branch November 20, 2024 20:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants