Update docker-compose.yaml #264
Conversation
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded@Dipanwita99 has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 0 minutes and 20 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
WalkthroughThe pull request involves a simple modification to the Docker Compose configuration, specifically changing the Docker image for the web service from one repository to another. The change updates the image source while maintaining the same service configuration, suggesting a potential switch in the image maintainer or repository. Changes
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)
docker-compose.yaml (1)
Line range hint
1-8: Consider adding health checks and resource limitsWhile reviewing the Docker Compose configuration, I noticed some good-to-have improvements:
- Add health checks to ensure the application is running correctly
- Define resource limits to prevent container resource exhaustion
Here's a suggested enhancement:
version: '3.9' services: web: image: 12082014/node-app:latest ports: - "8000:8000" + healthcheck: + test: ["CMD", "curl", "-f", "http://localhost:8000/health"] + interval: 30s + timeout: 10s + retries: 3 + deploy: + resources: + limits: + cpus: '0.50' + memory: 512M + reservations: + cpus: '0.25' + memory: 256M
| @@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ version: '3.9' | |||
|
|
|||
| services: | |||
| web: | |||
| image: trainwithshubham/node-app:latest | |||
| image: 12082014/node-app:latest | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick (assertive)
💡 Codebase verification
Switch to a verified and well-maintained image source
Based on the Docker Hub API results, there are several concerns with the new image:
- The repository was just created today (date_registered: 2025-01-02) and has very low usage (pull_count: 8)
- It's maintained by an individual account with a numeric username
- The image lacks description, stars, and proper documentation
- The previous image (trainwithshubham/node-app) shows consistent maintenance and higher usage
Recommendations:
- Revert to using the previous
trainwithshubham/node-appimage or provide documentation about:- The relationship between the two repositories
- The build process and security measures for the new image
- Reasons for switching to a personal repository
- Consider using specific version tags instead of
latestfor both stability and security tracking
🔗 Analysis chain
Verify the new image source and consider version pinning
The change switches the image source to what appears to be a personal Docker Hub repository. This raises some concerns:
-
Please verify and document:
- The ownership and maintenance of the new image repository
- The build process and security practices
- The relationship between the old and new repositories
-
Consider using a specific version tag instead of
latestto ensure deployment consistency and avoid unexpected updates.
Let's verify the image details:
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check image details and compare with the previous image
# Check new image details
echo "New image details:"
curl -s "https://hub.docker.com/v2/repositories/12082014/node-app/tags/"
# Check previous image details for comparison
echo -e "\nPrevious image details:"
curl -s "https://hub.docker.com/v2/repositories/trainwithshubham/node-app/tags/"
# Check pull statistics and last updated
echo -e "\nRepository details:"
curl -s "https://hub.docker.com/v2/repositories/12082014/node-app/"
Length of output: 2796
Summary by CodeRabbit
trainwithshubham/node-app:latestto12082014/node-app:latest