primeval_god

Community Developer
  • Posts

    835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by primeval_god

  1. I agree that I would prefer the existing base tier, but if I had to speculate (and this is only wild speculation) the new base tier may be a response to the demand for a application host only version. For a while there have been a lot of people who want a cheaper tier without an "array" to use as a Docker/Application host without NAS functionality.
  2. Its more like pro with 1 year of updates and an optional subscription for future updates. After the year you can continue to use the OS at the last version that was available while your update subscription was live (a key distinction in an era where a lot of software requires a subscription for continued use).
  3. They will have to wait until the new update utility is integrated into unRAID. Until then they will have to use the old update utility without any of the new features.
  4. Create a Dockerfile something like this (basically copied off of the dockerhub page for the official python container) FROM python:3.10 COPY requirements.txt ./ RUN pip install --no-cache-dir -r requirements.txt WORKDIR /scripts #Uncomment below if you want to include your script inside the container #COPY . . #CMD ["python", "./yourscript.py"] put you requirements file in the same directory. If you want to bundle your script into the container put that in the same directory as well and uncomment the bottom 2 lines in the docker file. Build a local image with this command (from the same directory) docker build -t local/mypythonimage:latest . when finished you can run the script in one of the following ways. If you included your script in the images just run the following form anywhere on the system docker run --rm -it local/mypythonimage:latest If you did not include the script in the image run docker run --rm -it -v /mnt/user/path/to/your/script/dir:/scripts local/mypythonimage:latest python yourscript.py If your script needs access to other files on your system you will need to bind mount the directories into the system with additional -v flags.
  5. Yeah LXC is a bit like running a VM without the overhead. You can get a full featured linux distro within the container much like a vm. There is no need for an nfs share to get access to files on the host system. LXC containers allow you to pass folders from the host system in a similar manner to docker. As for the specific error you posted, it would be best to ask about that in the LXC plugin support page. I am not an expert in LXC, I have never had such an error setting up container on unraid. Regarding python in docker, it can actually be quite simple to setup if you are only using the container to hold the environment. A dockerfile, based on one of the official python images, that installs your env file should be pretty simple to write. Build the image locally then you can use it to run scripts from the unRAID command line or from a user script with a command something like this docker run --rm -it -v /host/scripts:/container/scripts -w /container/scripts local/python:3.10 python myscript.py -some-arg which launches a container, bind mounts the scripts directory from the host into the container, sets the container working directory to the scripts directory and then runs the command python myscript.py -some-arg
  6. Trying to run python scripts directly on unRAID is just asking for a headache. Save yourself some trouble and just run your scripts in a docker container or an LXC container (LXC requires a plugin). For docker there are several ways to handle it, you could build your whole script into a container, or your could create a very simple container from one of the python base containers that has only your venv in it and keep the script external. You could run it from a script in the user scripts plugin on a schedule using a docker run command to launch the container, pass through your python script directory and run your python script.
  7. When creating a new stack via the webui there is a dropdown for advanced options that allows you to specify the location of the project folder for that stack. In a future release an option to place the whole projects folder elsewhere will exist, no ETA.
  8. Projects that need to build their own containers are a more advanced usecase than I had intended on supporting in the webui.
  9. Not really except that containers run via compose can more easily be attached to multiple networks which can be useful for reverse proxy containers in some configurations.
  10. Does the gather functionality of the unbalance plugin accomplish what you need?
  11. It is but it is not recommended. Containers run through the console will not be particularly controllable via the webui. There is a plugin which installs compose and allows for managing basic compose stacks via the webui. Like dockerman however its designed to support compose stacks run through its ui interface not via the console or other methods. Compose stacks launched via means other then the composeman interface will not integrate with the interface. If your goal is just learning docker or learning to manage docker systems in general i would not recommend unRAID as the way to do it. unRAID is not a general docker host. unRAID focuses on docker containers as convenient way to have "apps" rather than being a general host for the myriad of other ways containerization can be used (microservices, clusters, C/I setups, etc). Many of the best practices of docker on unRAID are not the more general docker way of doing things (bind mounts preferred over container volumes for instance or running everything as root). If learning about docker is your goal i recommend using a VM or LXC container with a more general linux OS to host your container playground. Leave unRAID the unRAID docker host for running your important NAS services (media servers, backup servers, sync etc.).
  12. Check out the docker container called Netdata
  13. Yeah the general consensus for the reason they dont have a linux client is because of the number of people who use linux desktops is low compared to the number of linux based NAS and fileserver devices that people would try and backup.
  14. Safe mode doesnt just disable plugins, it leaves them uninstalled so they cant add pages to the webui. For most plugins even if their functionality is 'disabled' or turned off they are still hooked into the webui and could be causing issues. Something you might look for, using htop in the terminal or container like netdata, is high iowait. If iowait is high it can result in a sluggish system even if the processor is otherwise not busy.
  15. The requirements for the icons are the same as those of unRAID's Dockerman ui (whatever they are). All the compose manager does is apply a label to each container with the icon url you specify. Everything after that is built in unRAID webui functionality. There is a known issue where updating the icon url does not actually change the icon of that container (thus you kind of only have one shot at specifying the icon). The problem is with the way dockerman downloads and caches icons. I attempted a pull request for a fix but never got any traction. You can manually go in and delete the cached icons to force unRAID to redownload them.
  16. The reason Backblaze Computer backup is difficult or not possible to do on linux is specifically because they dont want people backing up a 90TB NAS to their "Unlimited" Computer Backup service. The fact of the matter is the $9/month that their Computer Backup service costs is just not a reasonable price to expect for 90TB or online data storage.
  17. False. unRAID is not heading towards zfs. They have added it as an option but have made no indications that they are moving away from XFS or BTRFS. Nor are they recommending it above the XFS or BTRFS except in the specific case for people who are looking to get he maximum possible read / write performance from a drive pool. My personal opinion is that their reason for adding ZFS support boils down to satisfying a fairly vocal group of customers (and potential customers) who come from TrueNAS and believe that ZFS is best filesystem. Also my personal opinion, but I dont think ZFS offers any advantages over BTRFS when used as a single drive FS in the unRAID array.
  18. It doesnt sound like an with the compose manager plugin. Aside from boot and shutdown the compose manager plugin does not do anything with containers in the background (unless you click buttons). The problem is more likely with whatever you are using to backup your containers.
  19. Have you rebooted since uninstalling?
  20. Are you using BTRFS? If so just make the directory you store your backups in into a sub volume (rename the folder they are currently in, create a sub volume with the name of the original directory, then move them into the subviolume). Btrfs snapshots are not recursive, so when snapshotting the top level the sub volume containing the backups will be excluded.
  21. Are you backing up your snapshots as well as you filesystem? You should probably just exclude your snapshots from your backup.
  22. This. Multi-user management is simply not a feature of unRAID (either officially or through community plugins). Generally i try and dissuade people from considering unRAID for business purposes as its security, update cadence, support options, and overall design goals are focused on home use cases. More specifically for your case i would not be comfortable basing business infrastructure on some custom workaround for an unsupported feature (multi user). If the above doesnt convince you my suggestion would be not to run your multi-user VM/containers directly on unRAID. Nest them within a VM with an OS that provides the multiuser control you need.
  23. I wouldnt say that unRAID was designed to be the opposite of RAID. It is a RAID like storage technology, that doesnt fit any of the traditional RAID levels. It offers the same redundancy of RAID 5 or 6 with improved worst case disaster recovery. It trades off some performance and block level pooling for the ability to remove and mount each data drive as a stand alone file system. You can almost do this now. Unraid does still require at least 1 drive to be in the unRAID "Array" but that requirement can be met with a small flash drive if you have no interest in the array. The rest of your drives can be placed in a BTRFS pool with whatever raid level you want. At some point the term array will go away and the unRAID "Array" will become just another type of pool. The requirement to always have an unRAID array with at least one disk will also go away at some point, but no ETA from limetech on either,