Debian 9 & OMV 4 to Debian 10 & OMV 5: some preliminary questions

  • Hello, here is yet another thread asking questions about the OMV 4 -> 5 upgrade, sorry.


    Back in the days, I installed OMV 4 over an existing installation of Debian 9 (because I needed extra stuff and it was easier to install Debian first). I use the system not only as a NAS, but also as a webserver, webdav server, plus some more things. I would like to upgrade to Debian 10 and OMV 5 without reinstalling everything if possible, because it's going to be a pain do do everything again from scratch. I thought I would highlight some of my installation and then ask some questions. I am aware of ryecoaaron's upgrade script, and I will use that eventually I guess. But first thing first. I'm going to list the plugins that I have currently installed, maybe someone can tell me if I can expect to find them all in OMV 5, because I haven't managed to figure it out clearly yet (yes, I had a look in the list of plugins from omv-extras). Here it is:


    openmediavault-backup (can do without)

    openmediavault-downloader (can do without)

    openmediavault-luksencryption (I noticed that it's in omv-extras)

    openmediavault-lvm2 (I noticed that it's in omv-extras)

    openmediavault-symlinks (I noticed that it's in omv-extras)

    openmediavault-webdav (cannot do without)

    openmediavault-diskstats (can do without maybe)

    openmediavault-mysql (would prefer not to do without)

    openmediavault-nginx (cannot do without)

    openmediavault-apttool (I noticed that it's in omv-extras)

    openmediavault-clamav (can do without)

    openmediavault-letsencrypt (cannot do without)

    openmediavault-locate (I noticed that it's in omv-extras)


    Now, some of then I can do without, but it would still be nice to know if they still exist. Looking at ryecoaaron's upgrade script, I see that mysql, nginx, webdav and letsencrypt plugins are marked for deletion. Does this mean that they're not available anymore in OMV 5? Is there something that replaces them, that I can use to manage those services?


    As I said, I use the system to manage other kind of servers as well. How much will the OMV upgrade interfere with everything else? Does it touch stuff outside of its own installation? I think I'm going to unmount my data drives before the upgrade just to stay on the safe side, but it would be nice if other aspects of the system are not completely messed up by the upgrade. Are there major changes that the OMV upgrade brings to Debian that I should be aware of?


    I do use shared folders, mostly because creating them was the only way to reference them to nginx, webdav, samba and the like. Now that shared folders are disabled by default, is there a different way to for example configure samba shares, or define base folders for webdav, webserver and similar? Or are these features not there anymore due to this? (I know that you can re-enable shared folders, but it seems to be highly unrecommended)


    I think these are good starting questions, I will get back to you if I get new ones. Thanks in advance to everyone who will help!

  • So if I well understand a lot of plugins will not be ported because they want people to use docker instead? That's sad. I really don't like the docker concept to be honest, and I prefer to have everything installed in the system. Regardless, I liked the ease of config that the plugins were bringing, I doubt I can configure e.g. nginx with a GUI in the docker image?

  • There is a learning curve for docker, but once you got the concept it is quite comfortable. I prefer to setup my container with docker-compose files.


    I doubt I can configure e.g. nginx with a GUI in the docker image?

    Why? You mean a webpage? Or something special?

  • I use the system not only as a NAS, but also as a webserver, webdav server, plus some more things.

    Just my 2 cents on that:

    I use a debian based server at home (installed it as debian bo in the old times, only the body is the same, over the decades all other components were switched often, but I needed ever to do more than a dist-upgrade to stay current), and xen for virtual machines (VM).

    Maybe that might be an option for you, too, once take the big step and make it new, but later you are much more flexible.


    I just upgraded from OMV 4 to 5, no big deal, every nicht my backup script takes a snapshot of the LVM container with OMB, so I'd nothing to lose, if anything breaks, just restore the old container.


    However, I just adjusted the /etc/apt-sources(.d) entries, and then apt update, apt upgrade, apt dist-upgrade.


    I found a thread here that said to run:

    Code
    omv-salt deploy run nginx
    omv-salt deploy run phpfpm


    I did it, and that was all I hat to do. OMV 5 was up and running.


    Plugins should be disabled before.


    What do you mean with shared folders are disabled by default?

    Did I miss something? Maybe a link would be helpful, thx in advance.

    Backup: The duplicate copy of crucial data that no one bothered to make;

    used only in the abstract

  • Why? You mean a webpage? Or something special?

    I mean that the nginx plugin for OMV was quite neat to setup virtual servers and whatnot. It took a lot of learning out of you, and you would always be sure that the server was configured correctly (assuming you trusted who wrote the plugin). I doubt that the docker container will have the same nice interface. Also, afaik, the OMV 5 interface still runs over nginx, right? So the webserver is already installed in the system anyway. I don't see why don't keep the plugin and have only one instance in the system instead of two.


    The docker concept I don't like because it takes a lot more of hardware resources than just having the same program installed in the main system, as you need extra resources to run the VM as well. I'm not saying that it runs slower, just that it's more resource hungry.


    Micha aussem Pott: macom already clarified about the shared folders. Thanks for all the other info.

  • I don't see why don't keep the plugin and have only one instance in the system instead of two.

    One of the advantages is that the host and the docker are separated. So you can have different versions running on both. No dependency issues.

    It is difficult (impossible?) to break the system with a docker.

    The docker concept I don't like because it takes a lot more of hardware resources

    Do you have evidence for that?

  • So if I well understand a lot of plugins will not be ported because they want people to use docker instead? That's sad.

    That's not the primary reason. The primary reason is that everyone who works on and supports this product does so voluntarily and there are no longer enough people available to properly maintain and port plugins.

    --
    Google is your friend and Bob's your uncle!


    OMV AMD64 5.x on ASRock Rack C2550D4I C0 Stepping - 16GB ECC - Silverstone DS380 + Silverstone DS380 DAS Box.

  • Do you have evidence for that?

    Granted the fact that I don't want to turn this into a flame (so let me know when to stop, it's also kind of OT in respect to my request anyway), does it really need hard evidence? On one side you have a program running, on the other side that same program running is contained in its own OS, which also needs resources to run. It's not hard to figure out that a docker container will consume more resources than a program running directly inside the host system.


    That's not the primary reason. The primary reason is that everyone who works on and supports this product does so voluntarily and there are no longer enough people available to properly maintain and port plugins.

    That is even more sad, but understandable then. At least the problem are resources, not lack of will.


    So, more to the point: the webdav and so on plugins need to go, but I don't want to switch to docker if possible. At the moment the service is configured, and I guess it doesn't really depend on the OMV plugin anymore. When I remove the related plugins to update, is there a way to keep the current configuration of all these services as it is now, so that they can continue running even if it won't be as easy to administrate them anymore?

  • On one side you have a program running, on the other side that same program running is contained in its own OS, which also needs resources to run. It's not hard to figure out that a docker container will consume more resources than a program running directly inside the host system.

    If your contention is that programs running in dockers also contain their own seperate OS, it's wrong. They don't. They use the host's kernel.

    --
    Google is your friend and Bob's your uncle!


    OMV AMD64 5.x on ASRock Rack C2550D4I C0 Stepping - 16GB ECC - Silverstone DS380 + Silverstone DS380 DAS Box.

  • When I remove the related plugins to update, is there a way to keep the current configuration of all these services as it is now, so that they can continue running even if it won't be as easy to administrate them anymore?

    It may or may not be possible. If you remove a plugin, the program files are deleted but it may be that the configuration files for the program will be left behind. Only trying this on a case by case basis would tell. You would still have to install the program package and hope that your existing configuration isn't overwritten. Maybe you make backup copies of the files first. If you purge a plugin, it's all gone.

    --
    Google is your friend and Bob's your uncle!


    OMV AMD64 5.x on ASRock Rack C2550D4I C0 Stepping - 16GB ECC - Silverstone DS380 + Silverstone DS380 DAS Box.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!