Update single-runtime-image.md #4580
Conversation
adjusted bulelt point
|
Your Platform.sh environment has successfully deployed. 🚀 See the changed pages: Platform.sh docs |
…-and-cons-for-different-types-of-mounts
added new page with new mounts section and combined sections too
removed new page and added new mounts content to composable and single runtime image pages again
updated platform docs with new mounts content
…-and-cons-for-different-types-of-mounts
| The `storage` mount is a shared network storage that is automatically added by the platform. It is required for applications that need to share files across multiple instances—such as user-uploaded media or shared assets. You can configure the size of this mount via the {{% vendor/name %}} UI. | ||
|
|
||
| Pros: | ||
| - Shared across all app and worker instances. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The worker instances do not get to share the same mount as the app instances for this kind of storage. You need to use the service mounts for that. The purpose is really just for horizontally-scaled applications to use the same files.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have removed the mention of 'worker' in this pro line!
| - Persistent across restarts and redeployments. | ||
|
|
||
| Cons: | ||
| - Lower performance due to network-based access. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Technically, the instance storage is also a network-based volume 😅
The storage mount is an NFS volume and not a "block storage" kind of mount, so it has a lot more synchronization overhead. Not sure how to express that in this doc without getting too much into details though...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've removed this con point altogether as it seems a bit more complex than the reader would need.
|
|
||
| #### Scaling | ||
|
|
||
| When horizontally scaling your app (multiple instances of the same app), using the appropriate mount type is critical. For shared data, a `storage` or `service` mount is recommended. For local-only data, use `instance` or `tmp` mounts. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's a bit weird to mention instance mounts here given that they're not previously defined on this document.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removed mention of instance here! Thank you for spotting!
sites/platform/src/create-apps/app-reference/composable-image.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sites/platform/src/create-apps/app-reference/composable-image.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
sites/platform/src/create-apps/app-reference/composable-image.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…-and-cons-for-different-types-of-mounts
|
@ralt I'm confused here... my original understanding was that
But we don't then further define on the dedicated page for
But then later in the mounts area, we use Back on the dedicated page for the Network storage mount type, the first example we go through is again sharing mounts between different applications (though we mention you can also use So, how do these two types of mounts differ? After reading through all of this, I'm going to infer the only difference is that the |
|
Given the amount of information now concerning mounts, I wonder if it we should consider moving all of this information to a dedicated page for mounts, and link to it from the app-reference page(s). |
…-and-cons-for-different-types-of-mounts
Why
Closes #4504
What's changed
Added section to single runtime image page.
Where are changes
Updates are for:
sites/platformtemplates)sites/upsuntemplates)