Container virtualization and the SCALE (RC-1) reality

Status
Not open for further replies.

parallax

Cadet
Joined
Dec 5, 2021
Messages
2
Actually, Nextcloud is one of the examples where using Helm and K8S, combined with iX's easy-rollback really shines. It actually uses a relatively large amount of k8s native features, at least ours does.
We can argue that aspect but basically my argument is containers (from a target customer use case perspective) are better dealt with in something mature like Docker and Portainer than what is currently a single node and rather customised k8s implementation; and how much of this is a good use of IX's time and effort to try to solve.

It's integration and ease of use bundled in a nice front end - as TrueNAS shows with storage - that is more valuable to the user than the functionality itself. Particularly if that functionality for the forseeable future looks like it is going to be clunky. TrueNAS puts a very nice and usable interface on top of other projects like ZFS, Samba, NFS etc and in doing so both enhances the underlying components and creates something where the whole is a great improvement on the sum of the parts. Why eschew that winning formula, particularly with limited resources, when it comes to VMs and containers?
Our inter-pod communication has "just worked" for about 6 months now. We even offer a generator to auto-generate the names of you've trouble with that
The point that I'm trying to make is plenty of solutions had working inter-pod communication out of the box years ago, with no situation arising where there was even a need to build an auto name generator "if you've trouble with that." I do not understand why there is this burning desire to reinvent the wheel if there is no customer benefit.
A large amount of the feature set is delayed for the second release of SCALE. We even had to push hard to even get something as simple as a loadbalancer disable toggle included.
So you're not happy with IX's implementation of k8s either? Basic features not included or running as you had expected? Customisations making things that work easily elsewhere harder on TrueNAS?
Plex is actually a relatively easy App to deploy, hence it was trivial to add and many users want to use it. That's enough of a reason to add it ofc. "easy PoC"
(Emphasis mine) Business users, who are the ones who pay IX's bills? Or enthusiasts, who largely don't?
It does not need hostNetworking, except in a few niche cases like some dvr setups. It's definately not needed for CGNAT. Plex works fine behind multiple layers of NAT, one more or less doesn't change that much.
Well, that's good for you but your experience with Plex and CGNAT doesn't align with mine.
It's not curated, it's an open system. based on Helm-Charts
I wasn't addressing Truecharts, unless you're part of IX either directly or at arm's length. What the community decides to do is up to them, I make no comment on how you want to spend your time. There are plenty of community repos for many different platforms that extend their functionality.

IX however is curating charts by making some specific ones officially available in the base config of the product they sell. I still do not understand why this is a good idea (for them), and this blurs further the proposition especially given that you already provide a competing chart for Plex, for example. I also wonder in passing if it is good for IX that one of their key differentiators is made in any way viable largely by the efforts of a group of volunteers, but that is a side issue.

I believe Truecharts is also curating charts as soon as you start security testing them and rejecting or partitioning off ones that fail, but that is up to you and obviously you can do what you wish.
First release is a "Stable Technical Preview". Large systems are not even close to be done yet:
- Backup and Restore of Apps in the GUI
- k8s Clustering
- Using Clustered storage within kubernetes
- Text fields in the GUI
- YAML Text fields in the GUI
- Build updating (if feasable)
- Automatic Updating (if feasable)
(and that does not include all the potential QoL issues that need to be looked at, once done)
So is the vision that an SMB customer would deploy multiple servers all running TrueNAS in a big cluster to run their whole k8s environment? In preference to say running TrueNAS as, well, a NAS and running a k8s cluster separately on vanilla servers, either virtualised or bare metal using any of the myriad of ways to do that? Because that seems farfetched, to say the very least, and then what is there today is even more misguided.
A good comparison for the future GUI would be KubeApps by Bitnami, which is the same + one or two extra features.

Comparing a product build in 1,5 years(!) by a small team with big players like Rancher and Portainer and expecting the same level of functionality in the first release is completely unreasonable.
You miss my point and then reinforce it. If you have someone else who has a big team and funding specialising in a particular piece of functionality, it seems churlish not to leverage that. Instead the idea here seems to be to take a small team + infill from volunteers (?) and then try to duplicate a polished piece of functionality which, as you point out, someone much larger and better funded has already done much better over a period of years.
That's the problem with a certain group of users here:
"I want it all, I want it now and I want it my way"
I don't know if that statement into the air was directed at me, but if that is your takeaway from what I have written it is incorrect.

I just want TrueNAS to do what is says it will do, this is not unreasonable. If it doesn't do it, tell me up front and then we're all on the same page and neither of us are wasting our time. Jeyare already established earlier in the thread and both you and Patrick agreed with them that the promise of TrueNAS - in all the taglines and infographics - is not well aligned with the reality today.

There is a gap in the market for that promise and the reason people are taking the time to discuss this is because we see potential for TrueNAS to fill it; but the path from where it is to where it seems to aspire to be is extremely unclear and perhaps better or more quickly achieved otherwise. I'm assuming IX is a company that would like to hear from its customers on its projects, and likewise as users we can have a civil discussion and be open minded about different views.
 

NetCobra

Cadet
Joined
Dec 3, 2021
Messages
5
......

As @Patrick M. Hausen Already explained: It's simply not done yet with the first release. Not for SME and not really for SOHO either.

First release is a "Stable Technical Preview". Large systems are not even close to be done yet:
- Backup and Restore of Apps in the GUI
- k8s Clustering
- Using Clustered storage within kubernetes
- Text fields in the GUI
- YAML Text fields in the GUI
- Build updating (if feasable)
- Automatic Updating (if feasable)
(and that does not include all the potential QoL issues that need to be looked at, once done)

A good comparison for the future GUI would be KubeApps by Bitnami, which is the same + one or two extra features.

Comparing a product build in 1,5 years(!) by a small team with big players like Rancher and Portainer and expecting the same level of functionality in the first release is completely unreasonable.

That's the problem with a certain group of users here:
"I want it all, I want it now and I want it my way"
I'm not sure if your post means official reply of TrueNAS SCALE team, but I'm really disappoint about it.

You promise a better future, by now it's just started and no one knows when will it come to reality.

But for the unknown better future, you do not allow TNS user to use mature technology/solution today, you even blame them just because they hope they could use the mature technology in TNS.

Even in your "better" future, user can only use the applications in your way, all docker compose/helm charts could not be used in TNS unless they are converted and added into a TNS catalogs; and I believe you will decide what user could choose, for example, if an application support both MySQL and PostgreSql, will you supply 2 different application option to different db option? I don't think so, TNS user lost the freedom here.

I'm really confusing who are the target users of TNS.
 

Samuel Tai

Never underestimate your own stupidity
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
5,398
I'm afraid there's no way past this impasse, and the parties are talking past each other. One side is just relating their disappointment with the current state of Scale. The other is saying the state of Scale is what it is, given the level of development to date. Both are correct, relative to their points of view.

This is very similar to the flame wars that took place when Microsoft switched to the Windows 8 UI, which didn't reach stability until 8.1, and didn't reach maturity until Windows 10.

As no further progress on this thread can be made, I'll lock this thread for further replies.
 

Ericloewe

Server Wrangler
Moderator
Joined
Feb 15, 2014
Messages
20,175
We've been asked to clarify, just so that everyone is on the same page, that iX and Truecharts are different groups.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top