Most advanced users would prefer to get rid of plugins on their systems and run those apps in a VM instead because it provides better stability and keeps the core unRaid "clean"...

 

FWIW this has been a very repeated mantra with no actual tests or benchmarks. Lots of scare quotes though.

 

While there are no statistics or hard data I can point to, all one has to do is take a look at the forums. The number of support threads involving GUI crashes or dependency issues from users not running any plugins at all is virtually non-existent. Users running a large number of plugins, OTOH, there's untold numbers of threads.

 

I do recall this. I believe many, if not all, of the issues were rooted in dependency conflicts. Someone requires openssl 1.0.1c for one thing, and 0.9.8r for another. There's not dependency resolution, and then you get all kinds of problems.

 

Many of the plugins themselves are actually quite simple. They're written in high level languages and I think for many of them (if not all), the problems don't lie in the bash or python scripts, but in the dependency conflicts.

 

For the record, I've been lucky. I run a number of plugins on my server and haven't had a single issue. It's been rock solid stable. But I also know there are lots of users who have had nothing but issues with plugins.

 

+1 same situation here.

When your computer runs out of memory it runs out and bad things happen or it swaps etc. etc. - yes? A VM is a virtual computer, if I tell it that it can have say 4gig of memory but its a pig and wants more the VM can limit it or if there's spare host RAM give it to the VM. In the ESXi world this increase in RAM is called ballooning. One of the really nice things is that if something goes REALLY bad and crashes hard the virtual computer should be the only thing effected and not bring down the entire computer. This takes process isolation to a whole new level! Software installed for one thing won't effect other things. Need something that works best in Windows? Load a Windows VM and run it, likewise different flavors of Linux. Done right this allows you to best leverage a single hardware platform and not have a bunch of memory or CPU sit idle - this is mostly important In a corp. environment but has proven true in my home where multiple computers were collapsed into one really capable unit. :-)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

i'm fairly new to virtualisation and now that i've tried it and realised it's not as much of a dark art as some would believe, i love it.

my next project is to relegate my mythtv baremetal server to a slave and have the main server on my "big rig"

Gotta do some more googling and trawling the myth forums to get it working right.

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown. It I can shift the applications to a VM then I can either hibernate the VM or force shutdown without causing issues with the array shutting down. I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown.

 

What if they were halted automatically when you decided to shutdown. What if they started automatically when you booted up? Would that solve your problem?

 

I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

 

This is ridiculous. Someone needs to fix that crap.

Nnicinabox if shutdown guaranteed a clean halt of the plugin and a start meant it would def start then this would be a massive improvement!

Nnicinabox if shutdown guaranteed a clean halt of the plugin and a start meant it would def start then this would be a massive improvement!

 

I agree. I need to do a little research, but I'm pretty sure boiler could do this out of the box. It could get added to the package automatically when it's built, so devs don't have to worry about adding support for it.

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown.

 

What if they were halted automatically when you decided to shutdown. What if they started automatically when you booted up? Would that solve your problem?

 

I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

 

This is ridiculous. Someone needs to fix that crap.

 

Agreed but the experiences with sab has pushed me further towards virtualisation as a model.... Software can be a hit and miss affair.

i can keep my unraid as clean as possible and play around with various software environments and programs without affecting it in a way that i just can't achieve with a bare metal unraid instance.

nicinabox I've seen your excellent work with boiler and it really is nice, I think if you could add something like this into boiler then you will have a lot of happy campers.

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown.

 

What if they were halted automatically when you decided to shutdown. What if they started automatically when you booted up? Would that solve your problem?

 

I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

 

This is ridiculous. Someone needs to fix that crap.

 

Agreed but the experiences with sab has pushed me further towards virtualisation as a model.... Software can be a hit and miss affair.

 

I think we've identified that sab has some core problems that need to be addressed. Virtualization of that process is a hack to prevent it from crashing the host OS. It's fine if folks want to go that route, but it's indicative of a bigger problem.

 

i can keep my unraid as clean as possible and play around with various software environments and programs without affecting it in a way that i just can't achieve with a bare metal unraid instance.

 

I'm not sure that anyone would recommend that you play around on your production box. I keep unraid VMs around for testing my software. It's a good idea to have multiple environments that you can test in.

 

nicinabox I've seen your excellent work with boiler and it really is nice, I think if you could add something like this into boiler then you will have a lot of happy campers.

 

Thanks for your kind words. I'll look into it.

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown.

 

What if they were halted automatically when you decided to shutdown. What if they started automatically when you booted up? Would that solve your problem?

 

I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

 

This is ridiculous. Someone needs to fix that crap.

 

Agreed but the experiences with sab has pushed me further towards virtualisation as a model.... Software can be a hit and miss affair.

 

I think we've identified that sab has some core problems that need to be addressed. Virtualization of that process is a hack to prevent it from crashing the host OS. It's fine if folks want to go that route, but it's indicative of a bigger problem.

 

i can keep my unraid as clean as possible and play around with various software environments and programs without affecting it in a way that i just can't achieve with a bare metal unraid instance.

 

I'm not sure that anyone would recommend that you play around on your production box. I keep unraid VMs around for testing my software. It's a good idea to have multiple environments that you can test in.

 

I have good separation with xenserver as my base OS, unraid runs in it's own VM and i have three constant VM's running under Xenserver. In the xenserver environment i can fire up a linux or windows VM, run whatever i fancy in it and if it doesn't achieve or i get bored i can delete it without affecting anything else on my server.

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown.

 

What if they were halted automatically when you decided to shutdown. What if they started automatically when you booted up? Would that solve your problem?

 

I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

 

This is ridiculous. Someone needs to fix that crap.

 

Agreed but the experiences with sab has pushed me further towards virtualisation as a model.... Software can be a hit and miss affair.

 

I think we've identified that sab has some core problems that need to be addressed. Virtualization of that process is a hack to prevent it from crashing the host OS. It's fine if folks want to go that route, but it's indicative of a bigger problem.

 

i can keep my unraid as clean as possible and play around with various software environments and programs without affecting it in a way that i just can't achieve with a bare metal unraid instance.

 

I'm not sure that anyone would recommend that you play around on your production box. I keep unraid VMs around for testing my software. It's a good idea to have multiple environments that you can test in.

 

I have good separation with xenserver as my base OS, unraid runs in it's own VM and i have three constant VM's running under Xenserver. In the xenserver environment i can fire up a linux or windows VM, run whatever i fancy in it and if it doesn't achieve or i get bored i can delete it without affecting anything else on my server.

 

Nice. There's certainly more than one way to skin a cat!

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown.

 

What if they were halted automatically when you decided to shutdown. What if they started automatically when you booted up? Would that solve your problem?

 

I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

 

This is ridiculous. Someone needs to fix that crap.

 

Agreed but the experiences with sab has pushed me further towards virtualisation as a model.... Software can be a hit and miss affair.

 

I think we've identified that sab has some core problems that need to be addressed. Virtualization of that process is a hack to prevent it from crashing the host OS. It's fine if folks want to go that route, but it's indicative of a bigger problem.

 

i can keep my unraid as clean as possible and play around with various software environments and programs without affecting it in a way that i just can't achieve with a bare metal unraid instance.

 

I'm not sure that anyone would recommend that you play around on your production box. I keep unraid VMs around for testing my software. It's a good idea to have multiple environments that you can test in.

 

I have good separation with xenserver as my base OS, unraid runs in it's own VM and i have three constant VM's running under Xenserver. In the xenserver environment i can fire up a linux or windows VM, run whatever i fancy in it and if it doesn't achieve or i get bored i can delete it without affecting anything else on my server.

 

Nice. There's certainly more than one way to skin a cat!

 

It works for me and allows me to play around and tinker without affecting my "solid core" in any way which is good as i'm an inveterate tweaker when it comes to computers and many times in the past i've fucked up perfectly good systems by mucking around.

I would suspect its unrar thats using up the ram. not sab directly.

 

nzbget uses unrar and doesn't eat memory like sab....

My main issue with plugins is the ability to stop the array and thus perform a clean shutdown. It I can shift the applications to a VM then I can either hibernate the VM or force shutdown without causing issues with the array shutting down. I have also seen memory issues with sab using as much as 3GB of ram in one instance and thus causing problems with the entire system.

 

I would suspect its actually unrar using the ram, not sab directly. giant rar set?

I would suspect its unrar thats using up the ram. not sab directly.

 

nzbget uses unrar and doesn't eat memory like sab....

 

nzbget and unrar fundamentally are just doing the same thing, passing off the unpacking to unrar / repair to par / etc.

if you could be so kind the next time you see sab 'eating up memory' do a top / ps -ef and report back so we can see what the real problem is.

 

I would suspect its unrar thats using up the ram. not sab directly.

 

nzbget uses unrar and doesn't eat memory like sab....

 

nzbget and unrar fundamentally are just doing the same thing, passing off the unpacking to unrar / repair to par / etc.

if you could be so kind the next time you see sab 'eating up memory' do a top / ps -ef and report back so we can see what the real problem is.

 

+1

I would suspect its unrar thats using up the ram. not sab directly.

 

nzbget uses unrar and doesn't eat memory like sab....

 

nzbget and unrar fundamentally are just doing the same thing, passing off the unpacking to unrar / repair to par / etc.

if you could be so kind the next time you see sab 'eating up memory' do a top / ps -ef and report back so we can see what the real problem is.

 

won't have sab back on my system ever, sab was giving me 10-11 in top whereas nzbget has never got above 1.7 on the same system. that's all i need to know.

I would suspect its unrar thats using up the ram. not sab directly.

 

nzbget uses unrar and doesn't eat memory like sab....

 

nzbget and unrar fundamentally are just doing the same thing, passing off the unpacking to unrar / repair to par / etc.

if you could be so kind the next time you see sab 'eating up memory' do a top / ps -ef and report back so we can see what the real problem is.

 

won't have sab back on my system ever, sab was giving me 10-11 in top whereas nzbget has never got above 1.7 on the same system. that's all i need to know.

 

furthermore in the same vm i was running sab in, i'm now running CP, SB and deluge as well as nzbget and getting less memory usage than sab alone.

I run Sick, SAB, Couch, Maraschino, Webmin, and a web based commandline in one VM on ESXi, no resource issues at all. Probably forgot some functionality too - think there's a music app and something else I'm forgetting. It's a pre-configured VM from aceshome. The VM I run to index usenet and build nzb is fairly busy too - also from aceshome. If any of this crashes or even if my FreeNAS VM crashes unRAID is unaffected.

 

I do wonder if unRAID as host will be as effective and as fast....

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I run Sick, SAB, Couch, Maraschino, Webmin, and a web based commandline in one VM on ESXi, no resource issues at all. Probably forgot some functionality too - think there's a music app and something else I'm forgetting. It's a pre-configured VM from aceshome. The VM I run to index usenet and build nzb is fairly busy too - also from aceshome. If any of this crashes or even if my FreeNAS VM crashes unRAID is unaffected.

 

I do wonder if unRAID as host will be as effective and as fast....

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

i tried maraschino but i prefer HTPC manager...

I run Sick, SAB, Couch, Maraschino, Webmin, and a web based commandline in one VM on ESXi, no resource issues at all. Probably forgot some functionality too - think there's a music app and something else I'm forgetting. It's a pre-configured VM from aceshome. The VM I run to index usenet and build nzb is fairly busy too - also from aceshome. If any of this crashes or even if my FreeNAS VM crashes unRAID is unaffected.

 

I do wonder if unRAID as host will be as effective and as fast....

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

This isn't quantitative without knowing your machine specs.

 

I run Sick, SAB, Couch, Maraschino, Webmin, and a web based commandline in one VM on ESXi, no resource issues at all. Probably forgot some functionality too - think there's a music app and something else I'm forgetting. It's a pre-configured VM from aceshome. The VM I run to index usenet and build nzb is fairly busy too - also from aceshome. If any of this crashes or even if my FreeNAS VM crashes unRAID is unaffected.

 

I do wonder if unRAID as host will be as effective and as fast....

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

This isn't quantitative without knowing your machine specs.

 

I'm not sure what machine specs have to do with the fact that all of this running together isn't having issues and that when\if it does it doesn't effect my other running instances. My server is a 4core Xeon with 32gig ECC RAM but no VM has more than 4gig of RAM  and a single core as I recall. The Linux VMs take so little resources it's not funny :-)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I run Sick, SAB, Couch, Maraschino, Webmin, and a web based commandline in one VM on ESXi, no resource issues at all. Probably forgot some functionality too - think there's a music app and something else I'm forgetting. It's a pre-configured VM from aceshome. The VM I run to index usenet and build nzb is fairly busy too - also from aceshome. If any of this crashes or even if my FreeNAS VM crashes unRAID is unaffected.

 

I do wonder if unRAID as host will be as effective and as fast....

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

This isn't quantitative without knowing your machine specs.

 

I'm not sure what machine specs have to do with the fact that all of this running together isn't having issues and that when\if it does it doesn't effect my other running instances. My server is a 4core Xeon with 32gig ECC RAM but no VM has more than 4gig of RAM  and a single core as I recall. The Linux VMs take so little resources it's not funny :-)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I'm thinking most users aren't running a quad core xeon with 32GB RAM. It isn't surprising that you can run all that stuff with no issue considering your setup. It would be surprising if you were on say, 1GB with a P4.

 

Maybe it's worth surveying people's specs to see what's realistically available?

 

I run Sick, SAB, Couch, Maraschino, Webmin, and a web based commandline in one VM on ESXi, no resource issues at all. Probably forgot some functionality too - think there's a music app and something else I'm forgetting. It's a pre-configured VM from aceshome. The VM I run to index usenet and build nzb is fairly busy too - also from aceshome. If any of this crashes or even if my FreeNAS VM crashes unRAID is unaffected.

 

I do wonder if unRAID as host will be as effective and as fast....

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

This isn't quantitative without knowing your machine specs.

 

I'm not sure what machine specs have to do with the fact that all of this running together isn't having issues and that when\if it does it doesn't effect my other running instances. My server is a 4core Xeon with 32gig ECC RAM but no VM has more than 4gig of RAM  and a single core as I recall. The Linux VMs take so little resources it's not funny :-)

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

i have a 4 core xeon also but with only 16gb ecc ram, but i have resources to spare.