Rick Sanchez Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 Last question for tonight, can it be accessed via a webgui? Link to comment
JustinChase Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 not that I'm aware of. I only used it to install other programs, like SABnzbd and sickbeard (sickrage). I'm now using docker containers to install these programs, so I'm not even using my archVM any longer. Link to comment
Rick Sanchez Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 You can use ArchVM to run independent operating systems though? Can't you? Link to comment
JustinChase Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 You can use the virtualization system of unRAID to run several virtualized operating systems, but Arch is a Linux operating system, so you wouldn't use that VM to run another OS, since it is an OS. I hope that makes sense. Link to comment
Rick Sanchez Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 Yes. Thanks. What are the benefits of running these apps in a separate VM over running them within UnRAID? Also how do you name the VM's? Link to comment
JustinChase Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 I would suggest you don't just try to run stuff because you can, but instead figure out what you need/want to run, then ask for advice on the best way to do it. Briefly, to run SAB in unRAID, you have several options... 1. as a plugin. 2. as a docker container 3. as a program installed in a Virtual Machine number 2 is probably the easiest, fastest, and most reliable. The others have their benefits, but I choose #2 personally. Link to comment
bkastner Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 I would suggest you don't just try to run stuff because you can, but instead figure out what you need/want to run, then ask for advice on the best way to do it. Briefly, to run SAB in unRAID, you have several options... 1. as a plugin. 2. as a docker container 3. as a program installed in a Virtual Machine number 2 is probably the easiest, fastest, and most reliable. The others have their benefits, but I choose #2 personally. Actually, while #2 will ultimately be the easiest, today #3 is likely the easiest for many users, just because it's pretty well documented and the heavy lifting has been done by IronicBadger for all the common apps used. With Docker there are still discussions on the right base OS, the right passthrough settings, getting self contained apps to talk properly to each other, getting things like MariaDB/MySQL interacting properly, docker container autostart and updates. Should I go on? Docker is the future, but the future isn't written in stone yet. If you want something easy, that just works today the VM approach is likely a better choice for many 6.0 testers today (at least in my opinion). Link to comment
JustinChase Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 This is not meant as an argument, but I'm not so sure the VM path is the easiest. Docker is certainly new, and the base images have changed several times already, but I installed one of the first SABnzbd images released, on day 1, and have installed 2 or 3 different dockers with different bases since then, and every time, SAB started and worked just fine, since they all pointed to the same config location. now, I'm not using mariadb, or plex, so those may not 'just work' the same, but I suspect that once the config is determined, changing dockers for ones with different base images should all still work fine, like SAB has for me. Whereas if one wishes to change the VM, they've got to find the config files, and incomplete downloads and more, then copy/move them to the array, then install a new VM, then put them back in the new VM. Plus, the permissions issues one can experience with VM's can be a frustrating situation also. Finally, docker is here to stay, of that I have no doubt. KVM or XEN, I don't think we can be sure of their future. Anyway, it's great we do have options, and I think we agree, plugins are not a good option! Link to comment
bkastner Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 This is not meant as an argument, but I'm not so sure the VM path is the easiest. Docker is certainly new, and the base images have changed several times already, but I installed one of the first SABnzbd images released, on day 1, and have installed 2 or 3 different dockers with different bases since then, and every time, SAB started and worked just fine, since they all pointed to the same config location. now, I'm not using mariadb, or plex, so those may not 'just work' the same, but I suspect that once the config is determined, changing dockers for ones with different base images should all still work fine, like SAB has for me. Whereas if one wishes to change the VM, they've got to find the config files, and incomplete downloads and more, then copy/move them to the array, then install a new VM, then put them back in the new VM. Plus, the permissions issues one can experience with VM's can be a frustrating situation also. Finally, docker is here to stay, of that I have no doubt. KVM or XEN, I don't think we can be sure of their future. Anyway, it's great we do have options, and I think we agree, plugins are not a good option! Hrmm... you may have a point. It did take a bit of work for permissions and mapping from the VM to the host. I guess I just glossed over that as it was a couple months ago already. I do agree though that Docker is obviously the final solution - I just think it's going to be a bit of head scratching for newer users for a bit until we have easily repeatable processes that just work. Link to comment
Rick Sanchez Posted June 29, 2014 Share Posted June 29, 2014 Arch VM it is then at the moment anyway Link to comment
ironicbadger Posted June 30, 2014 Author Share Posted June 30, 2014 Good evening all, I am writing this post with a view toward winding up my active involvement in the maintenance of the Xen / KVM / repo images and projects I've been running since January. There are numerous reason for this, some of them personal which I won't bore you with but others are more publishable. With the roadmap published by Limetech this week it is quite clear to me that headless Linux VMs, such my ArchVM, are not long for this world. Docker is the future for LT it seems, I'm not fully convinced yet but maybe I'll be proven wrong. Also, with the talk of potentially dropping Xen and the flip flopping over support various hypervisors I've decided to just call it quits as it takes up too much of my time to keep up with all the changes. I'm in the middle of writing a dissertation and am therefore a little pushed for time. Lately, and by that I mean the last 3-4 months, donations have all but dried up (bar the odd generous $5 here and there, thank you to those who did donate) yet my bandwidth usage is getting higher and higher, it approached 300gb last month. This is not sustainable or fair. As previously mentioned I am an MSc student and here in the UK we get no funding from the government so have to pay our own way and the few ££ a month matter. I'm also just a little bored of what unRAID has to offer. It is rather behind the times, admittedly better lately, but I'm seeing much, much better performance with AUFS and SnapRAID on a proper Linux distro base OS (not this Slackware crap). I enjoy being able to type 'package-manger install package' far more than what unRAID has to offer. I've been an unRAID user for 3+ years and know so much more now than I did when I setup my unRAID system, so if you like my training wheels are coming off. So in summary, I'm not going away or deleting my account or posts or anything but I will with immediate effect stop maintaining my ArchVM images (both Xen and KVM) and the ArchVMrepo. With that said, I use the archVMrepo for friends and family so you may get lucky and piggy back of that for a while but it will go away one day. I wish LT all the best and all that. Ciao for now. Link to comment
Recommended Posts