Deploying Nextcloud on k8s

Deploying Nextcloud on k8s

In our last blog post, we increased the stability of our Kubernetes cluster and also increased its available resources. With these improvements in place, we can tackle deploying our most complex application yet: Nextcloud. By the end of this blog post, you’ll have insight into the major architecture decisions we made when deploying Nextcloud to Kubernetes. As always, we’ll link the full source code should you want to dive deeper.

What is Nextcloud?


Before we investigate how we deployed Nextcloud, we need to know what it actually is. Nextcloud has a great website which outlines its full capabilities and benefits, but at a high level, its an “open source, self-hosted file share and communication platform.” We will use it to augment/replace uses of proprietary tools like Google Calendar, Trello, etc. With respect to architecture, the Nextcloud server is a web server written in PHP, and it can interact with several different database management systems, including SQLite and PostgreSQL.

Deploying Nextcloud to k8s from 1,000 feet

As Nextcloud is a web application, deploying Nextcloud to Kubernetes shares many similarities with deploying this blog to Kubernetes, which is a process we detailed quite thoroughly via this blog post. We need to deploy pods running a Nextcloud container and configure a service to route traffic to these pods. Sounds simple enough, right? However, as we’ll see Nextcloud introduces some interesting wrinkles for which we need to account.

Architecture Decisions when Deploying Nextcloud


Nextcloud presents a couple of interesting architectural challenges. First, Nextcloud’s current implementation relies on state written to the file system. Second, our Nextcloud instance needs initialization commands executed whenever we first deploy it. Finally, our Nextcloud instance needs a database to which it can write persistent state.

Deployment vs StatefulSet

As best we can tell, Nextcloud unfortunately is a stateful application. Specifically, it relies upon a config.php with a username/password that it creates during the initial installation process. Any additional Nextcloud container must have this config.php file, or else Nextcloud thinks it needs to redo the initial installation, which will fail. However, since Nextcloud itself creates this file, we can’t easily bind it as a read only volume on multiple pods.

We considered a couple different options. First, we considered creating a persistent volume claim in the ReadWriteMany access mode, meaning we’d attach the volume containing config.php to many pods. We could then use a StatefulSet resource to ensure only one pod was initializing the config.php, and then all remaining pods would see it already exists and understand they don’t need to create it. Unfortunately, this does not work because EBS volumes cannot be bound in the ReadWriteMany access mode.

Alternatively, we could generate the config.php file as a one-off job, store it as a Kubernetes secret, and the attach it in read only mode to each pod. This solution felt slightly too complex to be worth it at this time, though it remains an option for the future.

Finally, we decided to limit our Nextcloud replicas to 1, and ensure config.php was written to a persistent volume in the ReadWriteOnce access mode. With this setup, we retain config.php if our Nextcloud pod is terminated/killed, and don’t have to do any complicated initialization steps.

We can revisit this decision if we discover there’s a real need for multiple Nextcloud pods.

Manually Executing Commands on Boot

After our Nextcloud cluster is first created, we need to run some initialization steps. Specifically, we need to create our personal user account and enable/disable desired additional applications (i.e. Tasks, Calendar, etc).

We considered multiple options for executing this script. First, we thought about creating a Job which would be responsible for executing this script. We could then execute this Job when necessary (and could gate its execution via a flag in values.yaml). However, we ran into the same problem as before with the multiple replica pods for Nextcloud. Our script needs config.php to execute, yet currently only one pod can mount the volume containing config.php.

We also considered configuring our Nextcloud pod to run this script during its init process. However, the commands in this script will only succeed once, and we expect that the Nextcloud pod will be recreated multiple times through its lifecycle. It felt like a bit of an anti-pattern to be continuously running a script we expect to fail. Additionally, if we swallowed failures, there’d also be the risk that we’d miss an actual legitimate failure.

For simplicities sake, we decided to just execute the script in the currently running pod (with the config.php) and trust the user to remember to run it. Considering the user cannot log in if they do not exec the script, there seems to be a fairly small chance of them forgetting.

See the for a more detailed description of how we expect the user to interact with the script.

Running the backing database

We also had to decide how to run the database Nextcloud needs to store all its state.

The simplest option would have been using SQLite, which is what Nextcloud does by default. We could have mounted a persistent volume to wherever SQLite writes data, meaning loosing the Nextcloud pod would not cause data loss. However, we were fairly concerned about how using SQLite would impact performance. We felt we needed to use Postgres to get acceptable performance. Additionally, using SQLite would’ve been an additional design decision which forced us to only use one pod.

After deciding to use Postgres, we had two options: pay for a hosted Postgres instance (i.e. RDS) or self-host the database on our Kubernetes cluster. We ultimately decided against RDS for multiple reasons. First, it was non-trivially expensive, even if we utilized the smallest database. Additionally, the support for creating a RDS database using Kubernetes primitives wasn’t as defined as we would like. Finally, we weren’t sure if introducing RDS would cause us to sacrifice dev/prod parity, as we’re very hesitant to pay for both a dev and a prod RDS database.

With these concerns in mind, we decided to at least attempt self hosting our Postgres database on Kubernetes. We chose to deploy via the Postgresql Helm Chart because we are already utilizing Helm as the basis for our deployments, and Helm’s dependency model allows us to specify the Postgresql chart as a dependency of our Nextcloud chart. Another option we considered was kubedb, but we had difficultly getting it to work with a couple hours of experimentation, and ultimately decided to move on.

While we went with self-hosted Postgresql deployed via a Helm chart, we imagine we’ll revisit this decision in the future as both the technologies we decided against mature.

I can haz source code??


All the design decisions we’ve discussed below are reflected in the source code, which is organized like a standard Helm chart.

Future work and conclusion

In the interest of releasing MVPs, we deployed our Nextcloud application before it had all of the functionality we could desire. We intend to add the following features over the next couple of months, and have created the following tickets to track them.

It was exciting to deploy a more complex application like Nextcloud to our Kubernetes cluster, and we look forward to continuing to improve our deployment over time. We’ll be sure to share updates as blog posts as we do.


comments powered by Disqus