Hi Everyone,
I’m trying to work out why the ‘DEFAULT’ and other *.yml file combinations fail to create a working web front end. The only options which works for me is:
COMPOSE_FILE=docker-compose.yml:docker-compose.override.local.yml:docker-compose.override.standalone.yml
And this option allows me to upload a qgis project onto a self-hosted server. Apparently (according to the documentation) ‘Standalone’ is discouraged and I should remove ‘local’. Only the above combination works or should I be using another sequence all together. Any suggestions from anyone who has got a full self-hosted environment file working I would be great to hear from you.
@shapley26 - sorry for the slow reply. It is a tricky question you ask there. I will forward it to the corresponding people and have them reply. Thanks for your patience.
Here is an answer of the development team:
"The local setup should be avoided when working with real data, this setup is actually used for developping QFieldCloud, locally. The appropriate way to go is with an external PostGIS database and external S3 storage, as it is mentioned in the technical documentation, here : Architecture overview - QField Ecosystem Documentation.
So not using any local docker-compose override neither standalone one. The standalone is for local development and getting the project up and running fast, but not for production use.
If you need more specific support please email sales@qfield.cloud
Hi Beanzmo,
Thank you for clarifying.
From what you have just said I interpret this as potentially just two options:
docker-compose.yml:docker-compose.override.prod.yml
Which avoids ‘local’ and ‘standalone’ or
docker-compose.yml:docker-compose.override.staging.yml
in contrast to the above your web page states:-
“For small self-hosted environments you may run QFieldCloud on a single server using docker-compose.override.standalone.yml , but this is entirely at your own risk .”
You perhaps could understand the confusion!. I’d completely understand if you don’t want to clarify.