Polite bump for Limetech opinion on this feature request.

Polite bump for Limetech opinion on this feature request.

 

Another polite bump.

This would be nice to have built in but frankly it is to much of a pain in the arse for the novice to deal with.  The CrashPlan software insists on updating itself which seems to completely bork itself and not work on the unRAID system (at least for me).  This ends up forcing me to reinstall from the ground up and jump through hopes to get the same computer recognized again.

All the more reason for it to an official addition rather than a user hack

We are on our 3rd new beta since the last bump so I think its appropriate to ask again.

 

bump

I vote -1

There are so many other features needed and this can be added by the user.

I respectfully disagree.

 

Adding packages should not be a requirement for small business users. A officially maintained backup solution is the only viable option for the unRAID business target market.

It's OK, we can agree to disagree.

 

This backup program is not an easy install without jumping through port forwarding hoops.

 

If a person has the technical aptitude to do this, then they have the technical aptitude to install it from the how to instructions.

 

As nice as it may seem. I think there are other things that unRAID needs.

Limetech's focus on performance has been spot on.

 

What is proposed with this program affects every user of unRAID, even for those who will not use or benefit from it.

The flash image gets larger.

The memory footprint gets larger.

Limetech's time is used on a backup package addition, rather then core unRAID services.

Then you have to add in the support time for people with questions.

If I may chime in, you don't get to say what other people find important...

 

I vote +1

 

For me, the essential features are email notification, backup and UPS.  Everything else is gravy, even performance.  It's very nice gravy, I don't want to take anything from all the work Limetech and the community has done but when the rubber hits the road, it's about data integrity.  These 3 are the holy trinity.  

 

I understand that everything is hackable (and partly done in my case) but crashplan is very nice and official support would be appreciated

 

Of course, I know nothing of the business requirement Crashplan might put on potential partners so I don't have any illusions.

 

Still, it's a feature request and I can wish...

 

Gog

It's OK, we can agree to disagree.

 

This backup program is not an easy install without jumping through port forwarding hoops.

 

Just for clarity Crashplan specifically needs no port forwarding. I run Crashplan in several locations most of which are NAT'd and firewalled with no firewall rules or forwarding and I have full P2P communication.

 

I still believe a backup solution is a missing requirement. Many/most NAS solutions have one and some make it one of their largest selling points ala WHS.

 

I also agree with Gog, if i had to chose between performance and backup then backup wins hands down by a HUGE margin. If i wanted performance I wouldnt have chosen unRAID; what it does now is adequate.

If I may chime in, you don't get to say what other people find important...

 

Actually I did not say what other people find important....

However, you did support me in that other "essential" features are important.    

I just did not publish the exact other features  that unRAID needs. (Which on my unpublished list were email notification and UPS support, among others).

 

What good is having support of one particular backup program if the environment does not have built in UPS support or email support if a condition occurs.

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I know, backup is important.

Some use rsync, unison, drive imaging software, etc , etc. There are many choices.

I don't think crashplan is the be all, end all, of backup programs.

 

I've owned many a nas solutions.

There are still some basic features needed just to insure the health of the array itself and notification of an event.

 

If Crash plan can be installed by an end user, it does not need to be in the distribution.

Someone can create an addon package.

 

Limetech focused on performance. I thought the focus was spot on.

Other people felt it important enough to communicate.

 

I would not want to dilute Limtech's effort in core unRAID services when a community can support higher level applications.

It's OK, we can agree to disagree.

 

This backup program is not an easy install without jumping through port forwarding hoops.

 

Just for clarity Crashplan specifically needs no port forwarding. I run Crashplan in several locations most of which are NAT'd and firewalled with no firewall rules or forwarding and I have full P2P communication.

 

According to the howto ttp://lime-technology.com/forum/index.php?topic=4008.msg35436#msg35436

You need to port forward a local port over an ssh tunnel to create the identity file.

There's a layer of applications needed just to configure it.

Is this outdated, Is there a more recent install doc?

 

 

I still believe a backup solution is a missing requirement. Many/most NAS solutions have one and some make it one of their largest selling points ala WHS.

 

But do they require a server, or do they use file services?

I don't know much about WHS. I've had a number of NAS devices. They call came with a backup program disk, but they still needed a mapped/shared drive. No server component was needed.

 

 

I also agree with Gog, if i had to chose between performance and backup then backup wins hands down by a HUGE margin. If i wanted performance I wouldnt have chosen unRAID; what it does now is adequate.

 

I agree with Lmetech's direction and decision.

I just added to this thread to voice my opinion that I did not want crashplan to be part of the main unRAID distribution.

I would rather have limtech focus on the other essentials.

Actually I did not say what other people find important....

And just to be clear, my comment was meant to be polite protest, nothing more

 

Don't get me wrong, I know, backup is important.

Some use rsync, unison, drive imaging software, etc , etc. There are many choices.

I don't think crashplan is the be all, end all, of backup programs.

 

I understand that we'll never find a universal solution.  This is used by a wide variety of users and linux based on top of it so if we did do something everybody liked we'd probably deserve a Nobel Peace price.  Still, I believe crashplan is a good alternative. 

 

There is a matter of implementation too.  It might be better to ask this as a feature request on crashplan's forums...

 

My hope is that crashplan would be open to integrations with NAS builders.  Maybe provide an interface that's more adapted to a headless system.  config file based instead of GUI, who knows, maybe a HTTP interface?

 

I think most of the problems user encounter when using crashplan on unRaid is in no way a fault of unRaid.

 

So in my opinion, this feature request is to ask Limetech to contact Crashplan and explain the distribution model and the business possibilities.  There is credibility when the request comes from a business that doesn't exist when JohnSmith3 posts on crashplan's forums.

 

Hell, I work in support, I *know* the impact of a post on the company's forum.  I'm simply betting Tom follows his forum better than CrashPlan

 

Frankly, I don't think Tom can do more than that...

 

And as to the port forwarding, I thing the argument is that crashplan doesn't need port forwarding to backup files, just to configure it.  Once the identity file is created, you can remove the tunnel.

 

 

Gog

 

I'll add my two cents here...

 

I agree... Lime-Technology should concentrate on core capabilities.... the API and structure we forsee in version 5.0 will allow us developer/guru types to supply add-on packages in a more structured fashion.  CrashPlan has its own business plan, and its own goals and objectives...  It is easy to see how is compliments unRAID's ability to store the backup of the data, but I do not know if Tom would want to tie his software so closely to another business's offering when it can be an add-on package.

 

I too think that error notification, via "beeps" locally, and e-mail remotely in the base product is WAY overdue.   The only reason it has not been as high a priority as adding support for SATA drives, migrating to the 2.6 kernel, adding NAS support is that solutions are available developed by users on this forum.   Initially, unRAID was delivered loaded on a 128k USB flash drive...  Initially lime-technology wanted room for two configurations in that space.  It still fits.  He has to constantly be aware that many users still run with 512 meg of ram... each added package add-on takes from that space.

 

Since unRAID is marketed as a Media server, this current issue of data stream pausing while a disk spins up is important to fix.  Now that general performance is improved, it is a logical bug to squash next. 

 

My own wish-list would be for the following order of features/fixes.

 

1. Fix the media-pause issue.  It is VERY disturbing when watching a movie to have it pause for 10 seconds or more on its own.  (I've already had my wife turn and look at me and ask "what's happening now" when it happens.  If it is a matter of spinning up a paired device on the same controller... I'll be happy to trade the small additional power consumption for the ability to watch a movie un-interrupted.   Make the paired spin-up a tunable... that way those watching every watt will be happy too.  Everyone has different needs. I can respect that.)

2. Add e-mail alerts on failures.  (can be easily supported by installing mailx and ssmtp)

3. Add support for apcupsd.   (we have enough proof now it will support many of the available UPS supplies)

4. Better support for NFS.  Fix the file-permissions issues so it works properly.

5. re-name the button currently labeled as "restore"  It has already caused data loss when pressed at the wrong time by at least one user of unRAID.

   (If Tom does not do it, it will be one of the first changes we users will do once we can modify/replace the user-interface in version 5)

 

Joe L.

Still, I believe crashplan is a good alternative.

 

There is a matter of implementation too.  It might be better to ask this as a feature request on crashplan's forums...

 

I agree with this 100%.

 

My hope is that crashplan would be open to integrations with NAS builders.  Maybe provide an interface that's more adapted to a headless system.  config file based instead of GUI, who knows, maybe a HTTP interface?

 

Agree again.

 

Here's an addition, It's hard to add a feature/addon like this without having a hook into initiaiting startup when the device is ready or knowing when it should be quiesced.

 

A program like this has the potential to hold the array busy and thus causing unclean shutdown.

 

Yes, I am making reference to a future feature, but it is needed in order to handle any add on server in a controlled manner.

 

I'm also aligned with what Joe L. mentions.

 

As I said before, limetech's resources are better spent on improving core services and adding features which allow others to add features/services cleanly.

 

A few of the points mentioned, should be brought to Crashplan's arena.

Maybe the whole identity configuration could be handled a different way.

 

A few of the points mentioned, should be brought to Crashplan's arena.

Maybe the whole identity configuration could be handled a different way.

 

 

It would be a simple matter if they allowed us to sign in via the command line.  You run the install script for Linux and get everything set up that way and then you have to launch the GUI to create the identity file.  If they would allow you to enter a username and password on the command line most of the problems would be fixed.

 

I have CrashPlan up and running on quite a few of my computers and it works great for what it is.  Reinstalling can be a pain in the arse but all in all it does not work to bad.

 

I am with Joe and WeeboTech on the general order of things that need to be done.  Getting Email notifiations, beep notification, and the pausing issue under control is higher on m list then getting crashplan installed by default.

It would be a simple matter if they allowed us to sign in via the command line.  You run the install script for Linux and get everything set up that way and then you have to launch the GUI to create the identity file.  If they would allow you to enter a username and password on the command line most of the problems would be fixed.

 

NAS maybe you could champion this on the crashplan forums.

More than happy to if Limetech would commit to beta trialling it.

 

As I have a complete end to end setup working for me already its alot of effort vs. no gain for me if were not going to add it.

I'd be willing to toot that horn on the crashplan forum and beta test.

Wow - I just learned about this program is I must say that Crashplan is sweet!

 

NAS - weren't you backing up one of your unRAID servers off site to another unRAID server?

 

I've been toying around with that idea, but was not sure how to even accomplish it or if it even made any sense to do so.