primeval_god

Community Developer
  • Posts

    832
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

primeval_god last won the day on June 4 2023

primeval_god had the most liked content!

Converted

  • Gender
    Undisclosed

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

primeval_god's Achievements

Collaborator

Collaborator (7/14)

236

Reputation

10

Community Answers

  1. Why not? Using containers to run scripts is actually quite convenient. See my comments in this thread for more info on how to do it.
  2. No. I am not a fan of autoupdates for anything, but especially not container stacks. If you are looking to auto update containers i would suggest looking into watchtower.
  3. I will start with a boiler plate opinion of mine which is, unRAID should not be used for business purposes, especially without someone who is deeply familiar with the OS. unRAID is designed for home usage and (in my opinion) the security and support guarantees are not at a level that meets the needs of a business. If you have no experience with NAS devices my recommendation would be to look into a totally off the shelf solution like something from Synology or a similar company. They are more expensive, but the support and reliability are more inline with business needs. It sounds like that may be what you are looking for. A NAS is just a dedicated network storage device, not unlike the windows server you are already using though typically focused on file storage only. No, most NAS devices dont run windows and happily co-exist and support windows networks. One word of caution though, typically you should have someone familiar with Linux if you intend to integrate a linux machine on a windows network. This is less important if you are using a NAS appliance solution that just happens to be Linux based (synology, unRAID, etc), but if a generic linux server distro (debian, ubuntu, etc) is something you are considering then you want someone who knows about integrating linux in a windows network environment. Here are a few more bits of advice for you (I am not looking to argue with any of the other replies above). It is important to understand the difference between RAID (which in this case includes RAID like solutions like the unRAID array) and the different forms of backup. RAID IS NOT BACKUP. RAID is meant to protect against hardware (specifically disk) failure and keep your data available if a disk should fail (downtime costs money). There are many things that it does not protect against including, corruption, accidental file deletion, filesystem problems, intentional (malicious) file deletion, and others. That is why a good backup strategy is crucial regardless of your hardware redundancies. Some things to consider for backup, you must have multiple physically separate copies of your data. Typically a local copy (on another machine or a removeable disk), and an offsite copy (cloud based or the old disk in a safety deposit box) are recommended. Retention strategies are also important, i.e. how often are backups done and how long are they kept. You might for instance have filesystem snapshots done on you data hourly, which get kept for a week, and daily backups to your local and offsite solution which get kept for a months and weekly backups that are retained for longer (note this is an off the wall example, not advice on a specific solution). Finally an very importantly, you must periodically test your ability to restore from all your various backup locations. You never want to be in a position where you need to restore from a backup only to find that it hasnt been working for some reason. Another thing that you should consider is the type of files you are storing and how they need to be accessed. For instance you NAS solution could look very different depending on if you are storing mostly text files, or media files like video. Also important is how many people/machines need access to the file at once and at what kind of speed.
  4. I think somewhere on the forums someone has scripted something to this effect, but my advice is that it is not worth the time. I believe that an upcoming version of unRAID will fix the display of update status for non-Dockerman containers.
  5. You cannot update containers created via compose using the built-in unRAID Docker page. Also the Update status displayed in the unRAID webui is not valid for containers that were created through means other than Dockerman.
  6. Take a look at these plugins https://github.com/dcflachs/compose_plugin https://github.com/dcflachs/swapfile_plugin particularly the pkg_build.sh as an example of how to build a .plg Its something I was asking for a long time ago, but it never happened.
  7. Its a known issue with the way dockerman shows networks.
  8. I dont think, generally speaking, that unRAID users are going for ZFS. Its inclusion seems like mainly an attempt to bring in people from truenas who see ZFS as an essential (mainly due to a perceived need for speed and bitrot protection).
  9. For the compose plugin there is no way currently to control the order in which stacks start, but that shouldnt matter as you should not have dependencies between stacks. As for containers within a stack I believe compose files have syntax to control which containers depend on others to start. An issue some people have is with stacks that depend on external networks. Specifically the docker networks that unRAID creates change on every bootup thus containers must be recreated (rather than restarted) on boot. There is an option in the plugin settings to recreate containers on startup, but my recommendation is to just use custom docker networks and ignore the ones unRAID creates.
  10. What services exactly are you referring to?
  11. Going to have to respectfully disagree here. Many unRAID users, myself included, routinely run systems a version or two behind the current latest release (some much farther). I just this weekend finally upgraded from 6.11 to 6.12. For us the lack of security updates is not new. An unRAID NAS is meant to run internally on a home network where its exposure to potential threats should be minimal. It would be nice to get ongoing security updates for a particular os version (without the introduction of features or potentially destabilizing changes), but at this point I am not to worried about it.
  12. Well ZFS is not the future for my unRAID servers. I have no interest in it and no intention of using it. As for something like Snapraid I also have no interest, realtime parity protection is a must for me. The unRAID array type is what brought me here and my filesystem of choice is BTRFS. For the purposes of single disk filesystems with unRAID driver parity i see no advantages of ZFS over BTRFS. Really my only wish for improvement to the unRAID style array (that isnt already in the works) would be leveraging filesystem checksums along with parity for bitrot protection (which i have accepted really isnt as big a threat to data integrity as its made out to be).
  13. Before you waste your time on this please note that any "fixes" are unlikely to be merged. I dont consider it to be an issue with this plugin. The problem is the same for any containers on the system created by means other than Dockerman (cli, portainer, composeman, etc.) thus the fix should be in Dockerman. Update tracking is not a feature of the compose manager plugin, and is in many cases irrelevant as locally built containers are a more common use case with compose.
  14. Try uninstalling the plugin and reinstalling.