Important announcement regarding FreeNAS Corral

[Jacopx]

https://forums.freenas.org/index.php?resources/migrating-from-freenas-corral-to-freenas-9-10.33/

Thanks! :)

It helps to read the announcements all the way through.

Mod note:

There's an FAQ about moving from FreeNAS Corral to FreeNAS 9.10.2 in the Resources Section. You can find it at this link.

- Ericloewe

Yes, but 15 pages are too much :(

 

[Ericloewe]

Yes, but 15 pages are too much :(

It's in the OP. The rest is discussion.

 

[Jacopx]

It's in the OP. The rest is discussion.

Ahhhhhhhh, I haven't seen it! :/

 

[Robert Trevellyan]

ZFS on linux has been considered stable and for production use since Sept. 2014 and shouldn't give you pause if you're considering going that route.

Agreed, if the whole "it's an appliance" thing doesn't float your boat. Everything just works. Bonus - LXD containers are a delight.

 

[indivision]

Wow. I get busy for a while and come back to this?

I'm trying to be optimistic. But, initial reaction is disappointment for several reasons:

A) I spent a lot of time learning and configuring Corral.

B) I spent a lot of time considering and submitting feature adjustments and bug reports.

C) Overall, it works great. There have been some glitches here and there. But, nothing major. I am skeptical of the idea that bringing Corral features to 9.10 is going to be any more stable than Corral was. I've been working in software development for many years. Once you make significant build changes/releases and get the public using them, you have lots of bugs. 9.10, to this day, still has bugs too. There is nothing magic about it that is going to save anyone wanting to new features from having to deal with bugs.

D) I have to say that the Angular based design screenshot is hideous compared to the current Corral UI. I hope that is a quick mock-up and a massive re-work of the UI design under Angular is planned.

E) There is zero reason to bloat and complicate the system keeping jails around. Its limitations proved themselves over several years in release. It takes some learning to switch. But, the docker system does everything jails did better. Out of the box there are many new, useful tools available there. Making both jails and docker available seems like a messy, confusing solution that will be more work to support.

F) I couldn't read all 15 pages of comments. So, correct me if I'm wrong. But, it sounds like the middleware system will be out? That feature alone makes 9.10 look like a turd in comparison. We are really going back to pre-2010 when we had to leave a web page running in order for operations to properly complete?

G) The number of people shifting back to 9.10, by itself, is not a good metric to base this decision on. A lot of those were probably due to reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of Corral.

This is too radical a shift in direction for software that so many people rely on, carefully choose their upgrade paths for, and invest their free time contributing QA for.

I think that the exact opposite approach would make more sense: Keep Corral. Re-do the UI so that it looks the same but uses an active framework instead. And MAYBE make an optional feature install of jails for those who can't find the 2 hours of time needed to learn docker. Keep fixing bugs as you will need to do in any case anyway.

 

[indivision]

I wanted to vent a little about Corral since I was one of the early adopters and contributors to docker container scripts.

The only reason I was one of the earlier adopters of FreeNAS Corral was because of the hyperconverged architecture and Docker integration. The cherry on top was the UI...and as bugs were fixed the UI got better and better.

I saw a comment that there were so many bugs in Corral and it would have taken it a year to get up to the stability of 9.x. Well, what do you expect when you are designing a system from scratch. The expectation that a brand new system would go to production without some bugs is unrealistic ... the main reason agile methodology was invented to replace waterfall development... unrealistic expectations.

If performance was the major issue with Corral, performance testing should have been done before the official release.

To me, there has to be more to the story. Looks to me like innovation wasn't given a chance. Jordan Hubbard was a very talented man and he is no longer with iXSystems.. and the development team (middleware and ui) were talented as well. Too bad to see all that great work be a so-called "failure".

Agreed.

Maybe you missed the part where the team behind the new UI disbanded. So that means either taking that project on yourself and continuing development or change to something with more active support and starting over from scratch. And that's just one of the stated issues.

With due respect. That isn't accurate.

The same GUI can be made using a different, active framework. And that would be making use of all the work that went into UX and graphic design which is not insignificant.

And if we're trying to avoid re-doing the UI from scratch, why is an Angular UI planned for 9.10 in mid-may?

 

[Ericloewe]

C) Overall, it works great. There have been some glitches here and there. But, nothing major. I am skeptical of the idea that bringing Corral features to 9.10 is going to be any more stable than Corral was. I've been working in software development for many years. Once you make significant build changes/releases and get the public using them, you have lots of bugs. 9.10, to this day, still has bugs too. There is nothing magic about it that is going to save anyone wanting to new features from having to deal with bugs.

That is simply not true, in general. Essential functionality like disk replacements did not work correctly.

E) There is zero reason to bloat and complicate the system keeping jails around. Its limitations proved themselves over several years in release. It takes some learning to switch. But, the docker system does everything jails did better. Out of the box there are many new, useful tools available there. Making both jails and docker available seems like a messy, confusing solution that will be more work to support.

Jails have much less overhead than Docker running in a VM. FreeBSD includes them. There's no bloat involved.

F) I couldn't read all 15 pages of comments. So, correct me if I'm wrong. But, it sounds like the middleware system will be out? That feature alone makes 9.10 look like a turd in comparison. We are really going back to pre-2010 when we had to leave a web page running in order for operations to properly complete?

Wrong, most of the work is already in place.

 

[ajschot]

A lot of discussion here, I can only say i keep on using Corral until I have my FreeNAS 9.10 working well, have some issues with updates and certificates (macOS does not like them from 9.10). Had no problems with dockers as much as with jails, but I was using Corral for a while (beta2) and had issues off course but I have also issues with 9.10.2 (and nighties which I am running now in a VM)
I did some things in CLI which made it much more easy and less code to use than normal shell would. Also the CLI help was great in Corral, I think there is a lot involved and not only all the bugs also Corral is a big change compared to FN9.10 and the whole work around is an other approach then 9.10 (under the hood it is all FreeBSD 11). Switching to Corral was a big change for a lot of people and that is maybe the thing that made it gone bad for some people. I hope that most of the stuff will be implemented in the new to come FN9.10 on the road until that i keep on using Corral until all my FN9.10 problems are fixed and it gives me enough stuff i care about to make the switch. Stupid? Maybe but it is running fine for my purposes now and i don't want to go back to jails that are old or does not include functions that i now have in a docker version.

 

[ajschot]

Wow. I get busy for a while and come back to this?

I'm trying to be optimistic. But, initial reaction is disappointment for several reasons:

A) I spent a lot of time learning and configuring Corral.

B) I spent a lot of time considering and submitting feature adjustments and bug reports.

C) Overall, it works great. There have been some glitches here and there. But, nothing major. I am skeptical of the idea that bringing Corral features to 9.10 is going to be any more stable than Corral was. I've been working in software development for many years. Once you make significant build changes/releases and get the public using them, you have lots of bugs. 9.10, to this day, still has bugs too. There is nothing magic about it that is going to save anyone wanting to new features from having to deal with bugs.

D) I have to say that the Angular based design screenshot is hideous compared to the current Corral UI. I hope that is a quick mock-up and a massive re-work of the UI design under Angular is planned.

E) There is zero reason to bloat and complicate the system keeping jails around. Its limitations proved themselves over several years in release. It takes some learning to switch. But, the docker system does everything jails did better. Out of the box there are many new, useful tools available there. Making both jails and docker available seems like a messy, confusing solution that will be more work to support.

F) I couldn't read all 15 pages of comments. So, correct me if I'm wrong. But, it sounds like the middleware system will be out? That feature alone makes 9.10 look like a turd in comparison. We are really going back to pre-2010 when we had to leave a web page running in order for operations to properly complete?

G) The number of people shifting back to 9.10, by itself, is not a good metric to base this decision on. A lot of those were probably due to reasons that have nothing to do with the quality of Corral.

This is too radical a shift in direction for software that so many people rely on, carefully choose their upgrade paths for, and invest their free time contributing QA for.

I think that the exact opposite approach would make more sense: Keep Corral. Re-do the UI so that it looks the same but uses an active framework instead. And MAYBE make an optional feature install of jails for those who can't find the 2 hours of time needed to learn docker. Keep fixing bugs as you will need to do in any case anyway.

Totally agree! I had no issues with Docker i think it is much easier than Jails also Docker are more update friendly and there is a lot more stuff then just a couple of jails there are in FN9.10. People forget that you can make 1 or more Docker hosts so you can more precise give the apps what they need or what you want them to use as resources

 

[userseven]

I think everyone would agree that the GUI (or some modern equivalent), CLI and dockers are high up on the list of things people would like to see ported/implemented in future iterations of 9.x train. Right now I'm happy I postponed wasting time configuring dockers in corral. I'm not even sorry about the jails I lost because it just happened the drive that hosted the jails and system dataset crashed right after upgrading to corral, so loosing them and starting from scratch would have been in my future even if I would have stuck with 9.10.2. I will stay with 10.0.2 (which is the only version reasonably stable for me) up until 9.10.3 will be released, then do a clean install from scratch and import the zraid pool into that. I'll give corral props for managing a basically one click upgrade from 9, but I'm not going down the same way I came up, if I'm starting from scratch anyway then a clean install feels like the healthier choice.

 

[Osiris]

Ok just read this and became quite quiet (sad nerdish pun intended).

Luckily I did not upgrade production systems yet, but I did put a lot of effort in Dockerizing certain jails.
Docker/Puppet like setups are being used more & more in professional environments so I was excited to learn, and I did even overcome that we-redid-Docker-the-proper-freenas-way attitude. I do hope (true, untouched) Docker will be part of the main stream soon (9.10.4 you say?)

Now we're back to the problem where the virtualbox jail no longer gets support and me being a stream behind on my other nasses.

Anyway, keep it up over there.
And do try to implement some of the very good ideas your excolleagues had, you twats

 

[André Fettouhi]

Well, this is surely a mess. Didn't expect this from FreeNAS. I decided early april to upgrade my FreeNAS install from 9.10 to Corral. I had a plex jail running which I decided to delete and setup a new Plex Docker which is running now. But I have issues with Corral. Like many I have the token expired issue at login so I have to restart the machine now and again. My FreeNAS server has all my music and I mount it via cifs onto my Arch Linux box. With Corral upgrade I have long hang times when trying to connect to the share and also timeouts occur as well. So my question, do I downgrade to 9.10.2 or wait out for 9.10.3 or wait for 9.10.4? Since 9.10.4 will have Docker support.

 

[indivision]

That is simply not true, in general. Essential functionality like disk replacements did not work correctly.

In general? Do you mean that some guy or some people with certain setups had issues with disk replacements? Or, nobody could do disk replacements at all?

Adding all of these features to 9.10 is going to create bugs "in general" also.

Jails have much less overhead than Docker running in a VM. FreeBSD includes them. There's no bloat involved.

Having two systems that attempt to accomplish the same functionality in the same application is bloat.

What does that overhead quantify out to? Are we designing the system to run on a computer that grandma gave away because she replaced it 5 years ago? The overhead difference of Docker is easily outweighed by the ubiquity of its use, community support and configuration model.

Wrong, most of the work is already in place.

That is good news at least.

However, is that without bugs? When is the bug testing for that major overhaul to 9.10 starting and ending? Some people are claiming that Corral was released too soon without enough testing. Yet, we're talking about releasing significantly altered versions of 9.10 with basically the same changes that Corral offered at an even faster pace.

 

[William Grzybowski]

Well, this is surely a mess. Didn't expect this from FreeNAS. I decided early april to upgrade my FreeNAS install from 9.10 to Corral. I had a plex jail running which I decided to delete and setup a new Plex Docker which is running now. But I have issues with Corral. Like many I have the token expired issue at login so I have to restart the machine now and again. My FreeNAS server has all my music and I mount it via cifs onto my Arch Linux box. With Corral upgrade I have long hang times when trying to connect to the share and also timeouts occur as well. So my question, do I downgrade to 9.10.2 or wait out for 9.10.3 or wait for 9.10.4? Since 9.10.4 will have Docker support.

You can wait next major release, which will bring VM support at the least.
That will be enough to deploy Docker one way or another if thats the path you want to take. If its not embed in the UI will have the option to install a docker manager on your own (e.g. RancherOS)

 

[André Fettouhi]

You can wait next major release, which will bring VM support at the least.
That will be enough to deploy Docker one way or another if thats the path you want to take. If its not embed in the UI will have the option to install a docker manager on your own (e.g. RancherOS)

Thanks for the clarification. When will 9.10.4 be out? Will Corral recieve any updates from now on or is it completely abandoned? Will a downgrade from 10 to 9.10.3 be straightfoward excluding the Docker feature? I don't mind setting up a fresh again for my Plex server.

 

[raidflex]

Having two systems that attempt to accomplish the same functionality in the same application is bloat.

What does that overhead quantify out to? Are we designing the system to run on a computer that grandma gave away because she replaced it 5 years ago? The overhead difference of Docker is easily outweighed by the ubiquity of its use, community support and configuration model.

The idea of docker is great, but correct me if I am wrong but didn't docker run in a VM on Corral instead of native on Freebsd? To me this kind of makes docker containers a waste in most situations, aside from initial ease of setup. Installing a Linux VM would still open up more app support vs a jail and still provide an easier initial setup path than manually configuring a jail.

 

[Ericloewe]

Do you mean that some guy or some people with certain setups had issues with disk replacements?

This...

Or, nobody could do disk replacements at all?

And it wasn't in the GUI at all. Crazy, right?

Adding all of these features to 9.10 is going to create bugs "in general" also.

Bug in new features are one thing. Bugs everywhere because so much was rewritten is a whole different thing.

Having two systems that attempt to accomplish the same functionality in the same application is bloat.

We also have several types of programming languages and yet you can't say that C is bloat because there's Python available.

What does that overhead quantify out to?

Surprisingly nasty for the common Plex server scenario, it seems.

Yet, we're talking about releasing significantly altered versions of 9.10 with basically the same changes that Corral offered at an even faster pace.

No. Corral was a complete rewrite of most of the system. Adding a few features to 9.10 isn't.

 

[Ericloewe]

Will Corral recieve any updates from now on or is it completely abandoned?

Not unless someone in the community picks it up.

Will a downgrade from 10 to 9.10.3 be straightfoward excluding the Docker feature?

There's an FAQ conspicuously linked at the bottom of the OP. It really pays to read the announcement all the way through.

 

[hugovsky]

THANK YOU!! My kind of people: You make something not right, you step forward and admit it.

Now, I just have to say this:

My first impression when I got here, was that it was a difficult forum, strange product full of tight hardware specs, some members were always nagging because of less than perfect terms, etc... but now, I thank this forum, this software and all this people that make and contribute to Freenas, because they made me see that cutting edge is not always needed. Always use good hardware to store your data. Keep reading to learn more. Listen to senior( not necessarily older... ;) ) people trying to help you. Do your research . Because in the end, it's all about your data. Your precious and irreplaceable data. That's the reason that brought me here. I've tested FreeNAS Corral. And I realized it wasn't ready for me. So, I just kept reading and waiting. Unfortunately, the outcome wasn't the best. Ok, as a lot of people already said, just pick up the pieces and make it better. I'm a little more with you after this.

THANK YOU ALL THAT GAVE ME A SAFE PLACE FOR ALL MY DIGITAL LIFE.

Hugovsky

 

[danb35]

And it wasn't in the GUI at all. Crazy, right?

How the hell did that ever get released?