[HN Gopher] What Is Unraid?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What Is Unraid?
        
       Author : aargh_aargh
       Score  : 57 points
       Date   : 2022-03-31 06:47 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (wiki.unraid.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (wiki.unraid.net)
        
       | elliotpage wrote:
       | I've used UnRAID for just over two years and it works a treat.
       | Well worth the cost of entry.
        
       | 4kelly wrote:
       | +1 for unraid. I've been using it for about 4 years. IMO it's
       | usecase sits in between synology and a completely self
       | administered server.
       | 
       | I found synology features great, but was frustrated about the
       | hardware lock in. I also didn't want to spend too much time
       | tinkering with a bare bones server. Enter unraid.
       | 
       | I use it as a backup server, fileshare, time machine backup. As
       | well as plex and other popular self hosted docker images.
        
       | Cyph0n wrote:
       | I've heard great things about Unraid, but ended up choosing
       | Proxmox to manage my home server. I am fairly tech savvy and
       | don't need anything "complicated", so Proxmox works perfectly for
       | me.
       | 
       | But I'd love to hear any thoughts from others who have tried
       | using both!
        
         | pocketsand wrote:
         | Agree. I went to Proxmox and virtualize TrueNAS. Best of both
         | worlds IMO and not at all any more difficult to manage.
        
           | nuker wrote:
           | Why not just TrueNAS?
        
             | pocketsand wrote:
             | Virtualization on TrueNAS/BSD leaves a lot to be desired
             | and in my experience just wasn't nearly as mature as on
             | Linux with KVM/qemu, etc. Likewise, BSD jails seemed to me
             | to be really well thought out, but when it came to getting
             | them to work for me to run little apps/services like I
             | could with Docker, or even a full-fat VM, I quickly gave up
             | because the juice didn't seem worth the squeeze.
             | 
             | Whereas on Proxmox it's a cinch for me to run like 20
             | different VMs/linux containers that I use for various
             | projects/jobs/etc. Huge ecosystem and really easy to take
             | advantage of massive community of linux/Debian
             | users/Docker/etc.
             | 
             | TrueNAS Scale, which is based on Debian, I think reflects
             | an acknowledgement of the pain points of working around BSD
             | for the types of services a lot of people want to use their
             | NAS for. I don't think I'm ready to switch yet, but maybe
             | in a year or two it will be a great solution.
        
               | xoa wrote:
               | Don't disagree with you that using TrueNAS Core as a
               | general server/VM platform (some other things as well)
               | has pain points. Some of which are BSDisms, some just as
               | you say due to the plain fact that the community is
               | vastly smaller. Even simple stuff like ports frequently
               | being a bit out of date, or lacking the diversity you'd
               | find elsewhere. Nothing that can't be worked around, but
               | always some extra time on a whole different thing which
               | in more popular environments (be it Proxmox/KVM/ESXi or
               | whatever) would just be there and then get out of your
               | way.
               | 
               | That said I do think though a NAS is one of the things,
               | even in a lot of homelab environments, that's actually
               | worth its own hardware separate from the VM if one can
               | swing the extra cost & space. I virtualized NAS for a
               | while too but since I wanted to run VMs themselves off
               | the NAS as well as a lot of other stuff, have a good
               | backup/restore story etc, I found it started to get
               | unpleasantly circular in terms of bootstrapping from a
               | cold start or restore. Also, the hardware requirements
               | for a good NAS are fairly distinct from a lot of what I
               | wanted for virtualizing. It's not impossible to cram lots
               | of hot swap drives _and_ full size PCIe cards including
               | GPUs for passthrough _and_ tons of CPU _and_ tons of RAM
               | into a single 4U by any means, but splitting things out
               | made it a lot simpler to optimize each side better. The
               | NAS could be smaller, cooler, quieter and good at its own
               | thing. After all-in-one I ended up with 3 distinct boxes:
               | router /gateway (OPNsense), VM system, and NAS system. I
               | know others have gone totally different directions, from
               | AIO boxes to wild K8s clusters doing it all, but I feel
               | like those provide a decent balance of flexibility and
               | stability/isolation, I can mess with stuff and feel
               | confidence in basic network connectivity or storage.
               | Isolation also means not feeling quite the same pressure
               | if one platform isn't as good at something as another, so
               | long as it's good at its own specialty.
               | 
               | > _TrueNAS Scale, which is based on Debian, I think
               | reflects an acknowledgement of the pain points of working
               | around BSD for the types of services a lot of people want
               | to use their NAS for._
               | 
               | I'm a bit bummed philosophically there. I've used BSDs
               | for a very long time, like much of the philosophy if not
               | all the warts, and fundamentally losing diversity in
               | software platforms even if open source is concerning. At
               | the same time it's hard to get around the raw power of
               | network effects in tech, and Linux has a ton of resources
               | and eyes thrown at it at this point. I have no plans or
               | interest in moving in the near future either, but it's
               | hard not to feel like the headwinds are building a bit
               | for TrueNAS Core. Though FreeBSD continues to put out
               | excellent releases, and it's gotten this far. I've found
               | myself on the underdog "but I think it's technically
               | better!" losing side of a lot of tech in my life though
               | :). It's always a balancing act in how much it's worth
               | working on a tool itself vs using the tool to do other
               | work.
        
       | recov wrote:
       | Slightly on topic, a nice low maintence (other than a
       | daily/weekly backup/scrub script) option without the need for a
       | specific OS is mergerFS, combined with snapRaid. The main benefit
       | is you can add and remove drives/directories willy-nilly. It's
       | been stable for me for the past 3 years, it just works.
       | 
       | https://github.com/trapexit/mergerfs
       | 
       | https://github.com/amadvance/snapraid/
        
       | shmoogy wrote:
       | I moved from FreeNAS/TrueNAS after 5ish years to Unraid. So far,
       | it's been a lot easier to get things working the way I wanted.
       | Worth the cost of entry
        
       | unixhero wrote:
       | I just use Proxmox and ZFS on an honest to god X86 box.
        
         | vdfs wrote:
         | Proxmox is better for running VMs and LXC containers, You can
         | run TrueNAS or unRaid on top of it with disks passthrou
        
       | mise_en_place wrote:
       | I was using it as a headless KVM server but the PHP panel is
       | rather buggy. Starting a VM doesn't always kick it off, and had
       | numerous issues with updating. It just lacks the polish of a
       | commercial product.
        
       | hnaccount141 wrote:
       | I've been using Unraid for a few years now and while it's served
       | me well I hesitate to recommend it. Were I to start over today
       | I'd definitely be looking at TrueNAS Scale or rolling my own.
       | 
       | Unraid seems to be targeting a rather niche market of people who
       | are used to building PCs for running Windows and would like to
       | have a home server and self host some apps (usually Plex and the
       | 'arr stack if we're being honest). It does a good job of making
       | all this accessible via a nice web UI with basic hypervisor and
       | container management features. The app store they have for Docker
       | containers is great for exposing new users to what's out there.
       | 
       | The problem I've found is that while it does a good job of
       | offering a low barrier to entry, the ceiling is quite low as
       | well. It seems to me that the type of user they're trying to
       | attract is also the type who would want to learn more and tinker,
       | at which point Unraid's limitations will start to chafe.
       | 
       | If you've used other Linux distros you'll find the lack of a
       | package manager and other atypical features frustrating. Once you
       | want to go beyond their app store for containers the web UI
       | becomes limiting. There's no first-party docker compose support.
       | The hypervisor UI is quite limited as well, lacking even the
       | ability to create and manage snapshots. Of course you can manage
       | all this from the command line, but at that point you may as well
       | use another OS with a more performant and reliable filesystem.
       | 
       | There are also some bizarre security choices that they've seemed
       | to have had difficulty moving past. The web UI is only accessible
       | as root, for example.
        
         | tylergetsay wrote:
         | In the same boat, I recently switched to running a VM on top of
         | unRAID and treating that as my app server and unRAID as a
         | software raid host, it feels safer than rolling my own
        
       | Sparkle-san wrote:
       | Unraid is interesting. I considered it years ago but didn't want
       | to spend the money at the time so I went with OpenMediaVault. But
       | at this point, I just run snapraid + UnionFS.
        
       | Ir0nMan wrote:
       | I have been an UNRAID user for years now and I have been very
       | satisfied with he product.
        
       | vanchor3 wrote:
       | I've been using unRAID for a while now, and it feels more like a
       | community GitHub project rather than a closed-source commercial
       | product I paid for. There are plenty of weird issues that don't
       | really make any sense but are apparently "by design", and support
       | usually hasn't been helpful in my experience.
       | 
       | I ran into an issue once where the Web interface wasn't working
       | properly. I looked online for a way to restart the service via
       | SSH, since none of the commands I could think of worked. I then
       | came across the amazing answer from one of the official forum
       | moderators that basically said "you don't need to know how to
       | restart the service, just stop having the problem." I could have
       | rebooted the entire system, but there were several Dockers
       | running as well as other systems that had the storage mounted
       | that I didn't want to interrupt for a simple web server issue.
       | 
       | There's also the fun BTRFS and Docker issues. Maybe it's just me,
       | but filling up a file system shouldn't completely corrupt it.
       | There are rules you can set such as "don't copy a file unless
       | 30GB is free" but somehow it seems to ignore this. You later find
       | your Dockers no longer work if you restart them, giving the
       | unhelpful error of "Error code 403", despite them working fine
       | moments ago. Sometimes it just seems to do this for fun without
       | the disk filling up.
       | 
       | I could go on and on about all the weird issues and odd design
       | choices.
        
         | slickdork wrote:
         | I've been using it for about 4 years and agree that it the
         | community feels like it's an open source project... and then
         | you remember you've paid for it, and there hasn't been a (non
         | beta) release in almost a full year, and all development is
         | happening behind closed doors.
         | 
         | I still really enjoy unraid for what it does, but I also feel
         | like I can't recommend it any longer.
        
         | n42 wrote:
         | it's such a pet peeve, but the unRAID community normalizing the
         | usage of "Dockers" for "Docker containers" makes me twitch.
        
           | remram wrote:
           | I regularly cringe when people refer to "Docker images" as
           | "containers" but this is a step further.
        
           | vanchor3 wrote:
           | That's a good point. I never thought of that before,
           | unfortunately I tend to pickup bad habits like that by
           | watching the way others write. Though I do have to wonder if
           | the Docker team would have used that term were it not already
           | a registered trademark. I suppose it does sound a little
           | silly.
        
             | n42 wrote:
             | that's not your bad habit, that's just how language evolves
             | naturally. like I said, a pet peeve. the part that makes me
             | twitch is that the evolution of the term is happening in a
             | hobbyist community, where I've never heard a professional
             | use the term. when I read it it doesn't make linguistic
             | since to me -- a "Docker" is not a thing, what is its
             | plural?
             | 
             | anyway, you do you.
        
       | aborsy wrote:
       | What does Unraid offer over Xpenology?
       | 
       | Synology is perfect as a NAS. If you want NAS+ general server,
       | you are better off separating the two.
        
       | francislavoie wrote:
       | My biggest annoyance is that they don't provide users a first-
       | party way to run their own containers from a source Dockerfile.
       | As a maintainer of an open source project, this is incredibly
       | annoying because our plugin system is build/compile-time, and
       | many users need to use certain plugins.
       | 
       | They also flip the order of Docker port mappings, where `-v
       | "8080:80"` would become "80 <- 8080" or w/e in their UI. And a
       | bunch of other idiosyncrasies with configuring containers.
       | 
       | And yeah, as others have said, "dockers" terminology hurts me
       | deeply.
        
         | hanklazard wrote:
         | The port mapping flip in the UI is seriously baffling. Not even
         | that it happened but that it continues to be case.
         | 
         | I feel that overall my unraid experience has been good and they
         | certainly make the implementation of some basic services and
         | plug-ins really easy. However I do find myself looking at more
         | fully manual, open-source "home server" solutions and wonder if
         | it would be worth a switch ...
        
       | yumiris wrote:
       | I used unRAID a while back for nearly two years. It's
       | delightfully convenient for managing Docker containers, multiple
       | disks w/ data parity, network file sharing, and even VMs with
       | passthroughs. The last feature, especially, is absolutely killer
       | with how easy it is to accomplish in unRAID.
       | 
       | Whilst a lot of unRAID's functionality can be achieved with a bit
       | of tinkering and reading, its UI does save a lot of time and
       | keeps things very simple. For example, I have yet to figure out a
       | way of achieving GPU passthrough on an Optimus laptop without my
       | hair going grey -- a part of me feels like unRAID might simplify
       | it, despite it being an OS for servers rather than laptops.
       | 
       | One thing I'd absolutely wish for is ZFS support. I haven't
       | looked into how ZFS's licence might interfere with its
       | integration, but if integration is possible, it would be
       | magnificent.
       | 
       | Nevertheless, unRAID is splendid at what it strives to do and
       | buying a pro licence for it was absolutely worth it!
        
         | tomschlick wrote:
         | There is a zfs plugin now. Here is a video outlining it:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umKXHO-hr5w
        
       | flatiron wrote:
       | I got lazy in my old years. I just use rclone and google drive.
        
       | jpgvm wrote:
       | Tried it. Decided for my needs that my Arch + ZFS based NAS is
       | still the way to go.
       | 
       | At the end of the day it's critical data for me that while backed
       | up to tarsnap would take a very long time to restore. By just
       | using ZFS and having regular scrubs etc scheduled properly I have
       | very high confidence my array will always be online when I need
       | it.
       | 
       | I could probably build a similar level of trust in another
       | product but ZFS (Under OpenSolaris, then Illumos, then FreeBSD
       | and finally Linux - all the same pool btw!) has earnt my trust
       | over many years.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-04-03 23:00 UTC)