OMV6 and LXC

  • Hi,

    please add full support to OMV6 so it can run in LXC container.

    At the moment, it won't even install OMV6, because of systemd-networkd.service.

    Tested on Proxmox7 and Debian Bullseye LXC.


    Thank you very much!

  • OMV 6 is still in early alpha testing. It’s not ready for production use.

    Simple and sure backup and restore: In a Scheduled Job: rsync -av --delete /srv/dev-disk-by-label-SOURCE/ /srv/dev-disk-by-label-DESTINATION/ (HT: Getting Started with OMV5)
    Server Software: OMV 5 (current) - My Main Server: Thinkserver TS140, Nextcloud, Plex, Airsonic, Navidrome, Ubooquity, Digikam, & Heimdall - My Backup Machine: NanoPi M4 (v.1), Pi-Hole - Odroid XU4 (Using DietPi) - Testing/Playing: hc2, xu4, Pi 3B+, Odroid H2. Mac user converting to Linux, Debian 10 KDE.

  • It’s not my amazing work. I just try to help direct traffic. I’ll display my ignorance by asking “What is LXC?” I’m guessing it is some kind of virtual platform. Heck, I just got my feet wet with VirtualBox for the first time about a month ago. What a blast!

    Simple and sure backup and restore: In a Scheduled Job: rsync -av --delete /srv/dev-disk-by-label-SOURCE/ /srv/dev-disk-by-label-DESTINATION/ (HT: Getting Started with OMV5)
    Server Software: OMV 5 (current) - My Main Server: Thinkserver TS140, Nextcloud, Plex, Airsonic, Navidrome, Ubooquity, Digikam, & Heimdall - My Backup Machine: NanoPi M4 (v.1), Pi-Hole - Odroid XU4 (Using DietPi) - Testing/Playing: hc2, xu4, Pi 3B+, Odroid H2. Mac user converting to Linux, Debian 10 KDE.

  • LXC is similar to docker, as in lightweight VM, but they are somewhat bulkier than docker containers and are not that ephemeral(i guees the right world in the container world). So great for admins.

  • OMV requires real block devices and access to hardware. It most likely will never run in LXC.

    omv 5.6.13 usul | 64 bit | 5.11 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.6.2 | kvm plugin 5.1.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • A physical disk can be mapped to lxc

    Yep but I'm guessing that defeats the point of why you are using LXC.


    But of course it would be better if OMV did not require a physical disk, but only a directory - even as an add-on.

    While you don't need a disk anymore for sharefolders (sharerootfs plugin lets you use a directory), there are still other things OMV does that require something that looks like a real machine.

    Otherwise I consider OMV a good tool for us admins.

    I don't think OMV has to run in LXC to a be a good tool. OMV in a VM works very well.

    omv 5.6.13 usul | 64 bit | 5.11 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.6.2 | kvm plugin 5.1.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • Yep but I'm guessing that defeats the point of why you are using LXC.

    Yes, LXC is not ideal for this.

    While you don't need a disk anymore for sharefolders (sharerootfs plugin lets you use a directory), there are still other things OMV does that require something that looks like a real machine.

    I use the plugin in VM. It's a great pity that OMV is not compatible with LXC.

    I don't think OMV has to run in LXC to a be a good tool. OMV in a VM works very well.

    LXC has many advantages over VM - better work with disk space, performance, security, migration.

  • LXC has many advantages over VM - better work with disk space, performance, security, migration.

    Disk space and performance (not that the difference is usually needed), yes. Security, definitely not. There are many exploits that breaks out of a container. Migration, no in most cases. You can live migrate a VM without downtime and a VM can even be converted between hypervisors (done it many times).

    It's a great pity that OMV is not compatible with LXC.

    I get it but it is designed to work with hardware. Running a container needs a different design and would change a lot of core OMV components.

    omv 5.6.13 usul | 64 bit | 5.11 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.6.2 | kvm plugin 5.1.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • It looks like OMV already works with LXC:

    Look at the date on that thread. Good luck.

    You can accomplish passthrough with bindmounts:

    That fixes a few things but not everything. If you can get it working, great. But it won't be worth it.

    I think the goal of using an LXC would be to reduce resource usage since its so light.

    If your host is so weak that you have to worry about the difference, then you are doing it wrong. If you are using virtual storage and network in the KVM vm, the difference between lxc and vm starts to get very small.

    omv 5.6.13 usul | 64 bit | 5.11 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.6.2 | kvm plugin 5.1.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • votdev

    Added the Label OMV 6.x (alpha)
  • ryecoaaron I think in this age of ever increasing software bloat and lack of optimization considerations it is important to take a step back and try to obtain the most and best performance with lowest resource usage possible. I know many share this same belief and I always try to make such decisions vs the other way of thinking.


    Can you tell me the performance impact of a vm guest approach vs a containerized approach with LXC, for example? I would really love to see some benchmarks/measurements to just differentiate them. I would really quite like to see that the differences are as small as you believe they are.


    Frankly I'm running in a VM on a pretty fat server and passthrough PCIs (HBA and USB). I want/think the isolation and clarity + restorability are probably worthwhile, BUT I am still interested in the LXC approach and want to see metrics. I think it is important and not to be discounted/discarded.

  • I think in this age of ever increasing software bloat and lack of optimization considerations it is important to take a step back and try to obtain the most and best performance with lowest resource usage possible. I know many share this same belief and I always try to make such decisions vs the other way of thinking.


    As someone who came from the Apple II+ and TI-99/4A days and who would spend plenty of time optimizing my autoexec.bat and config.sys in the msdos 3.3 days, I am well aware of that way of thinking. Running OMV on a minimal Debian install in a VM (or hardware)vs running OMV in an lxc container wouldn't change anything about bloat since they would both have the same packages installed.

    Can you tell me the performance impact of a vm guest approach vs a containerized approach with LXC, for example? I would really love to see some benchmarks/measurements to just differentiate them. I would really quite like to see that the differences are as small as you believe they are.

    Nope. For my home stuff, I go by feel. I can't tell any difference in performance in the containers I run in a VM vs containers running on native hardware. I'm sure there are lxc vs VM benchmarks out there though. Even if they are 25%, OMV on a fairly recent amd64 machine should still be able to saturate gigabit. Hell, I bet an OC'd RPi4 running an OMV VM could still come close to saturating gigabit. What performance with OMV are you worried about?


    I am still interested in the LXC approach and want to see metrics. I think it is important and not to be discounted/discarded

    Well, unless Volker makes changes to allow OMV to run in LXC, the LXC approach is pretty much dead in the water according to his above his response. With Volker's targeted user base for OMV, 99% or more of OMV users are not going to use LXC.

    omv 5.6.13 usul | 64 bit | 5.11 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.6.2 | kvm plugin 5.1.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • ryecoaaron who's Volker? I'm inferring that it's Agricola in context, but not clear.


    As to specific performance concerns, I have perhaps an identical background that you have as per your brief history synopsis. I simply always look for ways to improve performance / reduce processor utilization + energy requirements (via pushing more services to a system via some form of virtualization). When I can squeeze more (sane) processes with less utilization onto a system I do it and thus my interest.


    So far I've been shooting blanks of finding solid performance comparisons between KVM and LXC, but I'll post it here if/when I do happen across something that I feel is pertinent.

  • I'm using both in Proxmox, and i like LXC when size(RAM footprint) really matters. So usually some testing LXCs, etc.

    For bigger things(as in a lot more parts) , let's say Zentyal machine or similar I use KVM machines.

    I love LXC, but one problem in proxmox(well two if you are migrating to PVE7 and have problems with cgroups/2) is non-live migration.


    I don't have any concrete performance numbers, but this is my(professional) opinion in LXC/KVM case.

  • who's Volker?

    The primary (and only) developer of OMV. Forum name is votdev


    I simply always look for ways to improve performance / reduce processor utilization + energy requirements (via pushing more services to a system via some form of virtualization). When I can squeeze more (sane) processes with less utilization onto a system I do it and thus my interest.

    I'm not saying that is bad. I do that as well for a lot of things. I just put VMs and containers on fairly equal levels. They both have their pros and cons. I just know OMV doesn't work in a container and its resources used wouldn't be much more in a VM. I just don't have a good way to quantify that.


    So far I've been shooting blanks of finding solid performance comparisons between KVM and LXC, but I'll post it here if/when I do happen across something that I feel is pertinent.

    Performance and resources used are two different things. Perf could be measured by running something like Phoronix Test Suite in lxc and a VM on the same host. Resources used would be a little tougher.

    omv 5.6.13 usul | 64 bit | 5.11 proxmox kernel | omvextrasorg 5.6.2 | kvm plugin 5.1.6
    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github


    Please read this before posting a question.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

    Edited once, last by ryecoaaron ().

  • who's Volker? I'm inferring that it's Agricola in context, but not clear.

    BIG Laugh. Rolling all over the floor. I am to Volker what an ant is to the Almighty! No harm done, but humorous.

    Do I somehow give off that aura? I cannot imagine how. Agricola is Latin for farmer or man of the land.

    Simple and sure backup and restore: In a Scheduled Job: rsync -av --delete /srv/dev-disk-by-label-SOURCE/ /srv/dev-disk-by-label-DESTINATION/ (HT: Getting Started with OMV5)
    Server Software: OMV 5 (current) - My Main Server: Thinkserver TS140, Nextcloud, Plex, Airsonic, Navidrome, Ubooquity, Digikam, & Heimdall - My Backup Machine: NanoPi M4 (v.1), Pi-Hole - Odroid XU4 (Using DietPi) - Testing/Playing: hc2, xu4, Pi 3B+, Odroid H2. Mac user converting to Linux, Debian 10 KDE.

  • BIG Laugh. Rolling all over the floor. I am to Volker what an ant is to the Almighty! No harm done, but humorous.

    Do I somehow give off that aura? I cannot imagine how. Agricola is Latin for farmer or man of the land.

    So tell us newly crowned OMV developer... what are your plans for OMV 7?


    (sorry, that gave me a chuckle to)

    Air Conditioners are a lot like PC's... They work great until you open Windows.


Participate now!

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