@tecbox thanks for the update!

Hi @girish sorry for the delay. I think -D does not necessarily impact performance, my test after removing -D was much quicker but after adding it again it was just as quick. Seems like there's some kind of filesystem caching. Maybe at some point I could analyse the differences but I suspect changing this doesn't impact performance so much. The part that does impact performance a lot is the -x flag, but as far as I've seen, that will only prevent iteration on the remote (s3fs) filesystem if du is initiated on the parent dir, e.g. /mnt and not on the mount itself /mnt/s3fs. Would be a lifesaver if you could add this, but understandable if it cannot be done. If it cannot be done, a workaround to exclude certain volumes from disk usage calculation would be fine too. Or maybe you could add an option to the Disk Usage UI: Offer an option to include/exclude certain volumes before actually executing calculation

@jdaviescoates yes, there was a sshfs backup bug and I think 9.0.14 and 9.0.15 had fixed for exactly this. Unfortunately, Cloudron has no way to "force update" a bugged release.

@goseph10 that was a bug. I have fixed this in https://git.cloudron.io/platform/box/-/commit/1594d190eb29071c0aa11ff0a0e48554bb5fc04f You can edit /home/yellowtent/box/src/updater.js and fix line 229: if (!options.skipBackup && sites.length === 0) throw new BoxError(BoxError.BAD_STATE, 'No backup site is enabled to store automatic-update backups. Enable this in a backup site to continue.'); After that systemctl restart box

actually after looking closer in the code, the RRSet record api should also work as ich even for more records. It only would hit an issue, if one record has more than 25 values.

Hi @joseph . Thanks! Yes, the issue was with the encryption password. I successfully created a new app from the backup. However, one question remains: how can I restore a backup to NocoDB without recreating the app? The original restore (to the existing app) kept failing with the role already exists PostgreSQL error. Could this be related to memory limits? I checked and there seemed to be enough memory available everywhere. For context: my NocoDB has many records plus connections to external databases.

Thank you @james Increasing the part size has fixed the issue.

Thanks for you help

Right, the haraka log can be ignored. I think the IP and cert name don't match and thus the warning. It's not a problem since such mails don't leave the server.

I have this running too I thanks I have ork this out will update this post so if someone need to do it but thanks for the help sure I got it now I have found he keys ssl_certificate /home/yellowtent/platformdata/nginx/cert/_.XXXXX.cert; ssl_certificate_key /home/yellowtent/platformdata/nginx/cert/_.XX.key; just need to make a scp for on changes and to send a copy to the 2nd server..... Nozy

Created an issue. https://github.com/haraka/Haraka/issues/3516

@dleidert thanks for reporting. I have added a check now to check for package name match instead of the previous docker version match. This way the docker package will update when (the next) cloudon update happens.

Hello @estudios507 Thank you for the detailed report. I will try to assist you to my best capabilities. @estudios507 said in Cloudron rejects iCloud forwarding only when “Delete after forwarding” is enabled (SMTP 550 on MAIL FROM): Identify which Cloudron restriction/policy is triggering “Mail from domain ‘X’ is not allowed from your host” in this scenario. Regarding why this is happening. When iCloud forwards messages in delete mode, iCloud uses the original sender’s MAIL FROM (envelope-from) unchanged instead of rewriting it. If that original sender domain is hosted on the same Cloudron server, Cloudron sees an external connection (from iCloud’s outbound IP) claiming to send mail from its own domain. Cloudron treats that as spoofing and rejects it. @estudios507 said in Cloudron rejects iCloud forwarding only when “Delete after forwarding” is enabled (SMTP 550 on MAIL FROM): Confirm whether there is a supported and safe way in Cloudron to allow this specific flow (forwarding from iCloud with delete enabled) without broadly weakening anti-spoofing protections. There is also another topic regarding this issue with iCloud, see: https://forum.cloudron.io/topic/1998/mail-error-after-sending-message-mail-from-domain-example-com-is-not-allowed-from-your-host A fix is to add the iCloud servers to the domain A's SPF record. Your current SPF record is: dig TXT estudios507.com +short "v=spf1 a:mail.estudios507.com include:_spf.safewebservices.com ~all" You can edit that to include apple: "v=spf1 a:mail.estudios507.com include:_spf.safewebservices.com include:_spf.apple.com ~all" after that edit it can take some time to propagate, but this should resolve your issue.

Also, to speed up your auto updates you could change your auto updates to every hour and then just wait a couple of days for it to get through them all

@girish Running. Problem solved.

Thank you @james I could not get it to work. After several attempts, I ultimately deleted the backup files and started with a new configuration. As advised, I also set the retention period to "unlimited" (it was previously set to two days). Everything is working well now, and I was able to back up and clone the app without any issues. Thanks again, and keep up the good work!

Hello @sebastienserre App Archives are not the same as backups. App Archives is when you go to an app, to the uninstallation section and archive the app. This uninstalls the app but keeps the latest backup as an archive so it can be restored. This archive is stored and kept outside the backup retention policy. See https://docs.cloudron.io/apps#archive [image: 1768426785759-3ca46733-ecad-4ae3-8980-65d96397645c-image-resized.png] [image: 1768426835825-f592674b-3485-4155-b11d-048fd845ac60-image-resized.png] Your system backups are viewable under Backups> Sites.

@oskarardolo 9.0.16 will be out possibly end of this week or early next week.

@tecbox I sent a reply from support. I debugged this further . The 502 is returned from deSEC . I have added some logs on your server to see if we can get the full error to report to deSEC. So far, it's been running for the last one hour without reporting any error from deSEC .