Cloudron makes it easy to run web apps like WordPress, Nextcloud, GitLab on your server. Find out more or install now.


  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Bookmarks
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Cloudron Forum

Apps | Demo | Docs | Install

What's coming in 6.0 (take 2)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Announcements
142 Posts 22 Posters 23.6k Views
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • MooCloud_MattM Offline
    MooCloud_MattM Offline
    MooCloud_Matt
    replied to robi on last edited by
    #38

    @robi
    s3 filesystem are not so mature, i read a lot on them because use s3 with dovecot in our mail server and the performance are terrible in u use s3 as FS, 20/40 ms depending on where you host the s3 server.

    The optimal solution is to use plugin or software that integrate s3 in to the App/script that you want to use.

    Matteo. R.
    Founder and Tech-Support Manager.
    MooCloud MSP
    Swiss Managed Service Provider

    robiR 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • mehdiM Offline
    mehdiM Offline
    mehdi App Dev
    wrote on last edited by
    #39

    @girish I could not have imagined a better system ! Looks amazing !

    Three questions:

    1/ How do you decide where in the app these are gonna be mounted? Is it in the same path for all apps ? Or could I create a given volume, and mount it at /app/data/toto in app 1 and /app/data/tata in app 2 ?

    2/ How does it work when there already is data in the app's original /app/data before you mount the volume to it? Is it just hidden as long as the volume is mounted?

    3/ How does it work with regards to backups?

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • nebulonN Offline
    nebulonN Offline
    nebulon Staff
    wrote on last edited by
    #40

    For 1 and 2: Those volumes will be mounted into the apps based on /media/<volumename> and thus one volume associated with apps will always have the same mountpoint within the apps.

    For 3: Initially those won't be backed up at all, but we will likely add optional backup per volume as well. The user has to be aware of the fact that volumes are not part of the app backups as such!

    necrevistonnezrN 1 Reply Last reply
    3
  • necrevistonnezrN Offline
    necrevistonnezrN Offline
    necrevistonnezr
    replied to nebulon on last edited by
    #41

    @nebulon said in What's coming in 6.0 (take 2):

    For 1 and 2: Those volumes will be mounted into the apps based on /media/<volumename> and thus one volume associated with apps will always have the same mountpoint within the apps.

    For 3: Initially those won't be backed up at all, but we will likely add optional backup per volume as well. The user has to be aware of the fact that volumes are not part of the app backups as such!

    That’s the difference to storage mounted in „Resources“ - this will get backed up, correct?

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • nebulonN Offline
    nebulonN Offline
    nebulon Staff
    wrote on last edited by
    #42

    The volumes are setup outside of the apps first and are essentially independent. Once you've created a volume you can then mount that into an app via the Storage section in the app configuration. Even if mounted though, it will not be part of the app backup, since the main reason for volumes is to be mounted into multiple apps. For that we have to first figure out how to manage those with regards to backups.

    d19dotcaD necrevistonnezrN 2 Replies Last reply
    1
  • d19dotcaD Offline
    d19dotcaD Offline
    d19dotca
    replied to nebulon on last edited by d19dotca
    #43

    @nebulon That makes sense. I’m of the opinion that optional block storage should effectively be backed up at the host level not the application level. In other words, taking a snapshot or something like that which many providers allow even volumes / block storage to be snapshotted. Much like how we need to snapshot our actual VPS on occasion too for a backup strategy of the entire server.

    --
    Dustin Dauncey
    www.d19.ca

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • necrevistonnezrN Offline
    necrevistonnezrN Offline
    necrevistonnezr
    replied to nebulon on last edited by
    #44

    @nebulon said in What's coming in 6.0 (take 2):

    The volumes are setup outside of the apps first and are essentially independent. Once you've created a volume you can then mount that into an app via the Storage section in the app configuration. Even if mounted though, it will not be part of the app backup, since the main reason for volumes is to be mounted into multiple apps. For that we have to first figure out how to manage those with regards to backups.

    No, I mean external volumes that you can currently already move the data dir to under „Resources“ in the app settings - this gets backed up, correct?

    (FCDC6438-A854-4900-9C07-3D88E6DADC69.jpeg

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • girishG Offline
    girishG Offline
    girish Staff
    wrote on last edited by
    #45

    We haven't decided on the naming yet, but maybe Volumes can be instead renamed to External Media or something, if it clarifies things. Open to other suggestions as well.

    ei8fdbE 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • robiR Offline
    robiR Offline
    robi
    replied to MooCloud_Matt on last edited by
    #46

    @MooCloud_Matt this is only true if you use dumb S3 connectors that treat it like a filesystem instead of an object store.

    It's a very different experience when things are treated properly as objects.

    Life of sky tech

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • I Offline
    I Offline
    iqweb
    wrote on last edited by
    #47

    Re: Volumes - I think this will create a solution for something that I have been trying to resolve - i.e. Nextcloud app backups WITHOUT the data!

    I want to be able to back up the app via Cloudron natively - but backup the data via borg/restic/kopia or the like. This looks like it could resolve this issue if the data was an attached volume. Very much looking forward to this feature if it's like that.

    girishG 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • girishG Offline
    girishG Offline
    girish Staff
    replied to iqweb on last edited by
    #48

    @iqweb said in What's coming in 6.0 (take 2):

    Re: Volumes - I think this will create a solution for something that I have been trying to resolve - i.e. Nextcloud app backups WITHOUT the data!

    Yes, I think this will solve that use case. You mount a volume into nextcloud and configure nextcloud to use it as external storage.

    imc67I 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • imc67I Offline
    imc67I Offline
    imc67 translator
    replied to girish on last edited by
    #49

    @girish can you also mount an ‘on server’ folder like that?

    girishG 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • girishG Offline
    girishG Offline
    girish Staff
    replied to imc67 on last edited by girish
    #50

    @imc67 Yes. Currently, the main restriction is that you can only add host paths under /mnt and /media as a volume. So, you can create some NFS mount or SSHFS mount there and then add it as a volume and then mount it into an app.

    imc67I 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • scookeS Offline
    scookeS Offline
    scooke
    replied to ruihildt on last edited by
    #51

    @ruihildt There is a free tier, and if the "5 Mailboxes" means there is some functional email, then that is not bad.

    A life lived in fear is a life half-lived

    ruihildtR 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • ruihildtR Offline
    ruihildtR Offline
    ruihildt
    replied to scooke on last edited by
    #52

    @scooke I'm not sure what you're replying to?

    scookeS 1 Reply Last reply
    1
  • jdaviescoatesJ Offline
    jdaviescoatesJ Offline
    jdaviescoates
    replied to girish on last edited by
    #53

    @girish can't wait to have volumes to play with! 😛 what's your guestimate ETA?

    I use Cloudron with Gandi & Hetzner

    girishG 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • girishG Offline
    girishG Offline
    girish Staff
    replied to jdaviescoates on last edited by
    #54

    @jdaviescoates Cloudron 6 is ~2-3 weeks away. The translation project is quite a massive change, so maybe I am being overlay optimistic here.

    jdaviescoatesJ mehdiM 2 Replies Last reply
    5
  • jdaviescoatesJ Offline
    jdaviescoatesJ Offline
    jdaviescoates
    replied to girish on last edited by
    #55

    @girish all power to your elbow! (i.e. good luck!) 🙂

    I use Cloudron with Gandi & Hetzner

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • scookeS Offline
    scookeS Offline
    scooke
    replied to ruihildt on last edited by
    #56

    @ruihildt Your comment from 26 days ago, "As an aside, they are advertising Cloudron as free software, which is not correct at the moment." I came across it as I read through the entire thread.

    A life lived in fear is a life half-lived

    jdaviescoatesJ 1 Reply Last reply
    0
  • jdaviescoatesJ Offline
    jdaviescoatesJ Offline
    jdaviescoates
    replied to scooke on last edited by
    #57

    @scooke said in What's coming in 6.0 (take 2):

    @ruihildt Your comment from 26 days ago, "As an aside, they are advertising Cloudron as free software, which is not correct at the moment." I came across it as I read through the entire thread.

    I think you've missed the point 😄

    @ruihildt was talking about free as in freedom (which is how that project advertises Cloudron), not free as in price.

    I use Cloudron with Gandi & Hetzner

    scookeS 1 Reply Last reply
    0

  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.
  • First post
    Last post
0
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Bookmarks
  • Login

  • Don't have an account? Register

  • Login or register to search.