CP, SB and Sabnzbd+ plugins vs. VM??

[betaman]

Ok, so I've been trying to wrap my tiny brain around virtualization and whether or not it's a path I should pursue to get Couchpotato, Sickbeard and Sabnzbd+ running on my UnRAID server.  Until now, I've pretty much run a vanilla UnRAID setup with the exception of UnMenu and a few packages available from the package menu option (e.g. APCUPSD, Powerdown etc.).

 

I was hoping someone could layout the pros and cons of just using the available plugins from Influencer (assuming they'll continue to be maintained) vs. setting up a virtual environment (not even sure which one!) to host these apps plus the packages I'm currently using in UnMenu?  My goal is simply to offload these programs from my current PC but I'd prefer to do it the "right way" now rather than taking the plugin path now as a quick fix only to have to virtualize later.  I know there is pretty strong opinions on the pros of virtualization but I wasn't sure if my particular setup really warrants it or not.  FWIW, my tech level is moderate so virtualization doesn't scare me as much as wasting my time setting it up only to figure out it's overkill for what I need.

 

If someone feels strongly about setting up a VM then I'd also appreciate suggestions on which type and maybe some links to help me get started.  Thanks in advance.

[JonathanM]

It's almost like a sliding scale, the more stuff you want to run on your server, the better off you will be with virtualization, assuming your underlying hardware is capable. Many, many people have been running the trinity on otherwise basically stock unraid as you are describing, and it works well. If that's all you really want, the trail is well blazed, and you should be fine just following the guides. If you think you will continue to want to add and modify stuff, virtualization is the way to go. As things change, VM's are easier to update and modify.

[vl1969]

well everyone needs are different, many people run plug-ins to add functionality to the base server thus increasing the ROI factor.

meaning if I have this machine running 24/7 and it has resources to spare  why not use those resource?

but since vanilla UnRaid have limited support for standard apps

until recently people would have donate their time and develop additions (plug-ins) adapting applications to unRaid.

problem for the most part with this approach is that

(A)  a bad plug-in could bring down a whole system and you could loose data

(B) changes in UnRaid could break plug-in so it won't run when you update and you have to weight for the developer to update the plug-in , if he/she is still around and actually working on it.

© no matter how good the plug-in is it still may be limited in functionality compared to full app.

 

now if you can run a virtualized system where you can run the commercial apps

many of this issues go away.

you can run unraid in simple streamlined configuration where it does what it was designed for

and any other functionality is done using an isolated  system(s)

 

in this scenario any changes/updates to unraid will not break  other things

and any changes in additional apps will not break unRaid.

also you have the freedom to safely try anything you want  without jeopardizing the whole server stability.

so this will define what you want to do, run the plug ins or go virtual route.

 

if you think virtualization is a good fit  first and foremost you need to figure out if your hardware supports VT-D/IOMMU this will be the determining factor on what you can do and how soon.

here is why.

if you want to run unraid in VM you need support for pass-through of disk controller and for that you need full VT-D support with  CPU and MB with any current virtualization technology such as VMWare ESXi, XenServer Xen,KVM

 

if you don't have that you would need to wait until version 6 is stable as that will allow for using unRaid as VM host itself.

so you can run unRaid  bare-metal  as you do now and run VMs with in using Xen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[betaman]

Thanks jonathanm and vl1969 for the quick responses.  I guess I should've qualified the VM scenario with preferring to run UnRAID v6 once it's a stable release.

 

Suppose I pursue the VM path with UnRAID v6, which package makes the most sense in my case?

[bkastner]

Thanks jonathanm and vl1969 for the quick responses.  I guess I should've qualified the VM scenario with preferring to run UnRAID v6 once it's a stable release.

 

Suppose I pursue the VM path with UnRAID v6, which package makes the most sense in my case?

 

If you want to start looking at virtualization then I would suggest you look at Ironic's pre-built ArchVM. He has pre-built packages for SAB, SB, CP, Plex and others, which will both ease the learning curve going into virtualization as well as give you a pretty solid foundation to start from.

 

There is a Virtualization Appliances forum that contains the VM and pretty detailed instructions including videos.

 

On a side note, I would say virtualization as it stands today on UnRAID may be more difficult to setup as a perfect solution. I am currently running 6.0-beta3 and it took a bit of work to get my UnRAID shares seen properly, and configure SAB and Plex to use an extended data partition. Additionally I seem to be facing an issue where the shares don't always present 100% as I would like (i.e. Plex only sees 100 TV shows right now, rather then 135, and SickBeard reports that some shows are unavailable and marks downloaded episodes as 'ignored' rather than downloaded.)

 

There are benefits to jumping in early as the amount you will learn fighting through some of these issues is beneficial, but it's definitely not at a state of install and forget like UnRAID 5.0 plugins.

 

In the long run hopefully virtualized apps will be as stable as UnRAID plugins, and these growing pains will go away.

 

For most people, virtualization is going to be the way to go. It will help ensure a solid UnRAID installation untarnished by 3rd party apps (I used to get annoyed at Simple Features screwing up the UnRAID webgui in 5.0 - now I just run stock gui as I want UnRAID doing less things).

 

If you are looking at using UnRAID as your base OS and adding VMs on top, you will just want to make sure your CPU/Motherboard support Intel VT-X on AMD-X (I think it's called). This will allow for virtualization. VT-D/IOMMU is only required if you want to assign specific hardware to a VM (i.e. a video card for XBMC, or if you were virtualizing UnRAID then the USB controller with your license key).

 

 

[betaman]

Thanks for your response bkastner.  My current config is in my signature and a cursory Google search is somewhat inconclusive on the VT-* capabilities of the P5Q Premium.  I'll have to check my current PC mobo (it's a Gigabyte with an older LGA 775 quad core processor) but I can't recall which model exactly.  I don't think I want to go the VT-d route but if I have to upgrade the mobo/cpu/ram combo then I'll probably make sure it can do both.

[binhex]

You don't need vt-x or amd-v to run the VM ironicbadger setup

[bkastner]

Thanks for your response bkastner.  My current config is in my signature and a cursory Google search is somewhat inconclusive on the VT-* capabilities of the P5Q Premium.  I'll have to check my current PC mobo (it's a Gigabyte with an older LGA 775 quad core processor) but I can't recall which model exactly.  I don't think I want to go the VT-d route but if I have to upgrade the mobo/cpu/ram combo then I'll probably make sure it can do both.

 

It looks like your CPU supports both VT-X/VT-D, so it will all come down to your motherboard. Typically the easiest way to check is to boot into your BIOS and see if there is an option for VT-X or Virtualization that you can enable. I seem to remember with the P5 chipsets ASUS had virtualization specific motherboards (P5B/E VM DO) which I had, but am not sure about yours.

 

The same test is likely the best for the Gigabyte board as well.

 

[betaman]

Ok, I'll check later and report back.  Thanks again to all!

[dirtysanchez]

FYI, in older ASUS Socket 775 mobos, VT-x was often labeled as "Vanderpool Technology" in the BIOS.  That's how it was labeled on the P5B-Deluxe that used to be in my gaming rig.

[dirtysanchez]

A quick look at the manual for the P5Q Premium shows only a single virtualization setting in the BIOS labeled "Intel Virtualization Tech".  I'm willing to bet that board does VT-x but not VT-d.