Hey there,

I'm not a paying customer (yet) so don't feel any obligation to do something like this... I'm not sure if your customers actually need something like this - although I'd find it useful myself.

Currently, for backup retention, there is a dropdown of different types of retention schedules. These retention schedules are quite varied, and the ones towards the bottom are more geared towards the rsync backup option, I believe.

I like the options further down in the list (like 2 daily, 4 weekly) because they provide options if someone messes something up and you don't notice it for a while. However, currently I've been sticking with the tarball option because it's just a lot faster for backing up things like NextCloud. The downside though, is that tarballs are a lot larger, and running a 2 daily 4 weekly tarball backup uses up a lot of space.

I was wondering if it was at all possible for Cloudron to offer a few more retention policy options... things like '2 daily 2 weekly' (although I'm not necessarily sure this is the particular one you guys want). Whether that's by adding more options in the dropdown, or allowing us to set a specific number of daily, weekly, and monthly backups retained - I think either would be pretty awesome.

In any case, let me know what you think, and thank you for all of the work that you do. Your software is really helpful.

@girish This makes a ton of sense, although I'm not quite sure if I'm doing it right. Under what you linked to, the section should be under the Resources tab, although I think it's moved to the Storage tab (no problems with that, I just wanted to make sure I'm handling it correctly).

The part that's a little confusing is how 'App Data' and Volumes tie together in storage (now it seems this may be resolved as you said, since your working on Volume updating at some point in the future).

Anyways, App Data says to mount an external EXT4 disk, which I assume is done with the 'Mounts' interface right below it. However, the mount says that you are mounting 'Volumes'.

The documentation says 'App Data' is backed up. However, the documentation also says that 'Volumes' are not backed up. So that does leave me a little perplexed as to whether the data will be backed up or not. I think according to your comment, that it will be backed up (because you did say it would no matter where it is on the server). But I just thought I'd check

In any case, thanks for your help, and hope you have an awesome rest of your week.

My use case is a little different than yours, so I don't have a tutorial, but Directus shouldn't be terribly hard to integrate with a JAM website.

I'm currently using it as a source for a static website using Elder.js. Elder.js isn't a JAM - it's a static site generator - but it works kinda similarly. Directus works wonderfully for it.

In most of the JAM stacks, there is a point for fetching data, and at that point (assuming your using Node.js here), you just use axios to call the endpoints that Directus exposes. When you want to create user accounts or whatnot, you make an API call to Directus.

I don't know how well Directus would stand up to a busy traffic website performance wise, but I'm pretty sure it would do a great job for a low-to-moderate traffic website. It might be a good thing to ask them on their Discord, they are very friendly.

A good way to picture Directus is that it's a nice frontend to an SQL database. So a lot of the things you'd care about with a regular database will matter with Directus. It's not going to automatically manage the accounts for you - but it's not hard to create a collection called 'Website Users' and just add a user account when someone registers on your site, and then verify it when they log in, managing the cookie or token appropriately.

This of course means it isn't 'low-code', but it isn't 'that's a ton of code' either. (As a note, if your going for posts and logins and the likes, I'd stick with JAM, and stay away from static site generators - static site generators are really built for sites that don't have live content, not that you can't fenagle your way around it, but it's not what they are built for).

If your looking for a bit more automation then that for logins... there's a few other frameworks that have built in libraries for user authentication, but the only one I remember really standing out as being 'easy' was Meteor (using their old UI framework called 'Blaze'). But Meteor is pretty different from Directus, and it's very opinionated, and usually requires a heavier server. Might not be what you are looking for.

One thing I will warn you on Directus... sometimes, major version upgrades (think 8.?.? -> 9.0.0) don't work quite as planned (at least in my experience). So if you see they are going to put out a new major version soon, it might be worth holding out until they do. Just my personal experience though.

Best of luck with your project!

@BrutalBirdie Oh... that's interesting... I'll have to consider this solution.

Thanks you for it

@BrutalBirdie Cool. I'll keep this in mind and perhaps give this a try as well :).

Thanks for everything.

@jdaviescoates While I haven't tested this myself, I believe the best option for this (assuming you are only going to run the one app on the other server) is using a zone name.

I've disabled the front page as well, but in a slightly different manner.

If your the Admin Account, go to the upper right hand corner, drop down the menu, and click on Apps, you can turn off all of the front page stuff (they are all various apps).

Bit more work than doing this though.

Hey there,

I'm not a paying customer (yet) so don't feel any obligation to do something like this... I'm not sure if your customers actually need something like this - although I'd find it useful myself.

Currently, for backup retention, there is a dropdown of different types of retention schedules. These retention schedules are quite varied, and the ones towards the bottom are more geared towards the rsync backup option, I believe.

I like the options further down in the list (like 2 daily, 4 weekly) because they provide options if someone messes something up and you don't notice it for a while. However, currently I've been sticking with the tarball option because it's just a lot faster for backing up things like NextCloud. The downside though, is that tarballs are a lot larger, and running a 2 daily 4 weekly tarball backup uses up a lot of space.

I was wondering if it was at all possible for Cloudron to offer a few more retention policy options... things like '2 daily 2 weekly' (although I'm not necessarily sure this is the particular one you guys want). Whether that's by adding more options in the dropdown, or allowing us to set a specific number of daily, weekly, and monthly backups retained - I think either would be pretty awesome.

In any case, let me know what you think, and thank you for all of the work that you do. Your software is really helpful.

I've disabled the front page as well, but in a slightly different manner.

If your the Admin Account, go to the upper right hand corner, drop down the menu, and click on Apps, you can turn off all of the front page stuff (they are all various apps).

Bit more work than doing this though.

My use case is a little different than yours, so I don't have a tutorial, but Directus shouldn't be terribly hard to integrate with a JAM website.

I'm currently using it as a source for a static website using Elder.js. Elder.js isn't a JAM - it's a static site generator - but it works kinda similarly. Directus works wonderfully for it.

In most of the JAM stacks, there is a point for fetching data, and at that point (assuming your using Node.js here), you just use axios to call the endpoints that Directus exposes. When you want to create user accounts or whatnot, you make an API call to Directus.

I don't know how well Directus would stand up to a busy traffic website performance wise, but I'm pretty sure it would do a great job for a low-to-moderate traffic website. It might be a good thing to ask them on their Discord, they are very friendly.

A good way to picture Directus is that it's a nice frontend to an SQL database. So a lot of the things you'd care about with a regular database will matter with Directus. It's not going to automatically manage the accounts for you - but it's not hard to create a collection called 'Website Users' and just add a user account when someone registers on your site, and then verify it when they log in, managing the cookie or token appropriately.

This of course means it isn't 'low-code', but it isn't 'that's a ton of code' either. (As a note, if your going for posts and logins and the likes, I'd stick with JAM, and stay away from static site generators - static site generators are really built for sites that don't have live content, not that you can't fenagle your way around it, but it's not what they are built for).

If your looking for a bit more automation then that for logins... there's a few other frameworks that have built in libraries for user authentication, but the only one I remember really standing out as being 'easy' was Meteor (using their old UI framework called 'Blaze'). But Meteor is pretty different from Directus, and it's very opinionated, and usually requires a heavier server. Might not be what you are looking for.

One thing I will warn you on Directus... sometimes, major version upgrades (think 8.?.? -> 9.0.0) don't work quite as planned (at least in my experience). So if you see they are going to put out a new major version soon, it might be worth holding out until they do. Just my personal experience though.

Best of luck with your project!

@jdaviescoates While I haven't tested this myself, I believe the best option for this (assuming you are only going to run the one app on the other server) is using a zone name.

@girish This makes a ton of sense, although I'm not quite sure if I'm doing it right. Under what you linked to, the section should be under the Resources tab, although I think it's moved to the Storage tab (no problems with that, I just wanted to make sure I'm handling it correctly).

The part that's a little confusing is how 'App Data' and Volumes tie together in storage (now it seems this may be resolved as you said, since your working on Volume updating at some point in the future).

Anyways, App Data says to mount an external EXT4 disk, which I assume is done with the 'Mounts' interface right below it. However, the mount says that you are mounting 'Volumes'.

The documentation says 'App Data' is backed up. However, the documentation also says that 'Volumes' are not backed up. So that does leave me a little perplexed as to whether the data will be backed up or not. I think according to your comment, that it will be backed up (because you did say it would no matter where it is on the server). But I just thought I'd check

In any case, thanks for your help, and hope you have an awesome rest of your week.

@BrutalBirdie Cool. I'll keep this in mind and perhaps give this a try as well :).

Thanks for everything.

@BrutalBirdie One question I thought of, if you don't mind. If you use this setup, and your Cloudron box dies, is a full restore pretty easy with this setup, or kinda difficult?

@BrutalBirdie Oh... that's interesting... I'll have to consider this solution.

Thanks you for it

@BrutalBirdie Ah, perhaps I should clarify, I wasn't clear here.

I'm not using the Volume as a backup destination. I'm using it as extra space for an app, like say... NextCloud. You know, App Settings -> Storage -> Mounts.

It's a lot easier to find VPSs with cheap block storage than it is to find VPSs with cheap local storage, so it makes sense to stick the 'big data' apps on a block storage mount. I seem to recall people saying it would back it up, but the Volumes section in the docs says pretty clearly that it will not.

Just want to be sure :).

Hey there,

Just a small question.

I've read the documents that say that Volumes won't be backed up.

I seem to recall in the past someone saying that they would though - if they are formatted as ext4. Has this changed, or did I just mis-remember?

Also, if they aren't backed up now, are there any plans to enable this in the future, or not so much? Sorry just want to plan ahead to see if I need to get my storage space on the main disk rather than on a separate volume.

Hope you are having a great day!