Question

Sysbox installation on DOKS

Posted December 21, 2021 149 views
KubernetesDigitalOcean Managed Kubernetes

As per Sysbox user guide for installation in Kubernetes Clusters is a must worker nodes’ OS to be Ubuntu Focal or Bionic (with a 5.0+ kernel) (https://github.com/nestybox/sysbox/blob/master/docs/user-guide/install-k8s.md#kubernetes-worker-node-requirements) but DOKS workers are Debian based. Obviously that’s the reason why DOKS is not among tested Kubernetes distros pointed out(https://github.com/nestybox/sysbox/blob/master/docs/user-guide/install-k8s.md#kubernetes-distro-requirements).

Despite of all this I’m curious if someone has tried to install Sysbox on DOKS because of its various advantages it offers.

1 comment
  • OK, obviously this is very specific case. Nevertheless, if at some point someone still encounters this topic, just for information, here is the log output from Sysbox installation attempt on DOKS:

    Detected Kubernetes version v1.21
    Adding K8s label “crio-runtime=installing” to node …
    node/pool-pro-ugjfw not labeled
    Deploying CRI-O installer agent on the host (v1.21) …
    Running CRI-O installer agent on the host (may take several seconds) …
    Removing CRI-O installer agent from the host …
    Configuring CRI-O …
    Adding K8s label “sysbox-runtime=installing” to node …
    node/pool-pro-ugjfw not labeled
    Installing Sysbox dependencies on host …
    Kernel has version 4.19, which is below the min required for shiftfs (5.4); skipping shiftfs installation.
    Installing Sysbox-EE on host …
    ERROR: Sysbox is not supported on this host’s distro (debian-10).
    cp: cannot stat ’/sysbox-mgr’: No such file or directory

    Unfortunately this is the current situation. At the moment I’m not able to establish which one - the worker node distro itself (Debian) or its version (10) and respectively the kernel version (4.19) are the showstoppers. However, those look like the main suspects for the negative outcome (at least as per official prerequisites).

These answers are provided by our Community. If you find them useful, show some love by clicking the heart. If you run into issues leave a comment, or add your own answer to help others.

×
Submit an Answer
1 answer

Hi there,

This is an interesting case, I have forwarded this information to our Managed Kubernetes team for an internal follow-up.

An alternative solution in the meantime would be to set up a Kubernetes cluster on a few Droplets, that way you will have full control over the Kernel version of your servers.

Best,
Bobby

  • Hi Bobby,

    Thank you very much for your attention!
    I had (almost) decided that no one will be touched by this IMHO very intriguing subject. However, I’m glad that this is not the case after all.
    Firstly, I’m really grateful about your initiation toward the specialized team. It’s highly appreciated!
    Honestly, after the reported outcome, the suggested idea to set up custom K8s cluster crossed my mind, but if the present DOKS HW parameters I’m using are preserved under such configuration, the bill at the end of the month would be quite different actually :)
    Ultimately, it all comes down to some form of trade-off, you know…

    Finally, thanks again for your cooperation!

    • Hi there @cyberslot,

      As you mentioned indeed DOKS uses 4.19.0-17-amd64 Kernel version.

      I have just received some feedback from the team and can confirm that there are plans to include an update of the Kernel in the next minor version release (i.e. DOKS 1.22). This should be done in the next few months, most likely within this quarter, but there is no exact ETA yet.

      Hope that this helps!
      Best,
      Bobby