TrueCommand 2.0 is Released

[aervin]

@SamM we definitely want to cater to shops like yours. That said, we chose to publish TC2 via docker deliberately, it provides a great amount of flexibility (for most on-site users anyway). Let's put docker aside for now: how would you like to see TC packaged/distributed? What would work best for your shop? We will work with you.

Thanks for the feeback!

 

[SamM]

how would you like to see TC packaged/distributed? What would work best for your shop?

My preference? I'm a fan of what we're doing right now. Have a bootable *.iso that can be loaded into a baremetal PC just as easily as it can be loaded into any major Hypervisor (ESXi, VM Player, Hyper-V, FreeNAS/TrueNAS, etc), then let it update itself (and possibly it's peer if in a HA setup) using the same kind of process FreeNAS/TrueNAS already uses.

IMHO, a *.iso is just way too versatile and mature; even when compared to *.vmdk/*.vhd. Maybe I'm just old, but I fail to see how "docker" is better than good 'ol bootable *.iso.

Thanks for asking @aervin!

 

[Etorix]

So far, most/all of the HA & clustering features of TrueNAS SCALE (The S, A, & E if you will...) seem to be locked behind TrueCommand, which itself seems to be locked behind "docker" or the online hosted version. Bummer...

TrueCommand comes as a docker container, which means it can run on TrueNAS SCALE itself. The only lock is that a licence is needed to manage more than 50 disks.
What do you think prevents you from "the seemingly easiest solution of hosted TrueCommand"?

 

[aervin]

@SamM you might find this repo of deployment scripts useful. If your OS is not yet supported a script could be developed.

 

[ornias]

which itself seems to be locked behind "docker"

How is that locked? Docker even guarantees it runs on more systems out-of-the-box. I call that "less locked.

Also: No: the clustering is not locked behind TrueCommand, You can very-well cluster with "just" the gluster command. Doing so will even show up in TrueCommand. TrueCommandis just a fancy GUI.

but if 'TC' is going down the 'Internet dependent subscription service' route that's plaguing our industry, then much of TC's appeal goes right out the window.

Never did anyone say that, it was even available as docker container before there even was a hosted solution.

We also have neither *nux nor "docker" in any meaningful capacity leaving no viable path to try an on-premise TrueCommand, which in turn kills our ability to test TrueNAS SCALE's ability to act as a scalable, fault tolerant iSCSI server for mostly an ESXi environment.

I've no idea what *nux is, I think you mean *nix (aka. UNIX like). Which also means you are not running SCALE itself.

SCALE itself (for example: Using TrueCharts) also runs TrueCommand just fine. It's also not required to be enabled 24/7, so running it on a laptop "when needed" is also fine.

 

[morganL]

My preference? I'm a fan of what we're doing right now. Have a bootable *.iso that can be loaded into a baremetal PC just as easily as it can be loaded into any major Hypervisor (ESXi, VM Player, Hyper-V, FreeNAS/TrueNAS, etc), then let it update itself (and possibly it's peer if in a HA setup) using the same kind of process FreeNAS/TrueNAS already uses.

IMHO, a *.iso is just way too versatile and mature; even when compared to *.vmdk/*.vhd. Maybe I'm just old, but I fail to see how "docker" is better than good 'ol bootable *.iso.

Thanks for asking @aervin!

I think the answer depends on the machine you want to run it on. .iso is good if you want a dedicated machine. TrueCommand is designed so that it doesn't need a dedicated machine.. it can run as a docker container with other things. For example, you could use a TrueNAS SCALE .iso and then add a TrueCommand instance via the Apps.

So what is your target machine?

 

[ornias]

@SamM you might find this repo of deployment scripts useful. If your OS is not yet supported a script could be developed.

Aervin, with all due respect... Those scripts are just fancy frontends for installing/maintaining a docker container.

He stated he never wants to use docker AND is not willing to use *nix to run TrueCommand (which is a totally stupid demand IMHO), not that he is unable to use it due to skill deficits.

In this case the problem really is not the work you guys are doing: The project, Docs and Deployment options are not the problem. Layer 8 is.

There are definately things we as a community and you guys as developers could/should work on to make deployment easier or more flexible. But this isn't it.

My preference? I'm a fan of what we're doing right now. Have a bootable *.iso that can be loaded into a baremetal PC just as easily as it can be loaded into any major Hypervisor (ESXi, VM Player, Hyper-V, FreeNAS/TrueNAS, etc), then let it update itself (and possibly it's peer if in a HA setup) using the same kind of process FreeNAS/TrueNAS already uses.

IMHO, a *.iso is just way too versatile and mature; even when compared to *.vmdk/*.vhd. Maybe I'm just old, but I fail to see how "docker" is better than good 'ol bootable *.iso.

TrueCommand is not an Operating System, its an application.
Do you also send complaints to microsoft because Office isn't a seperate Operating system?

 

[aervin]

Yes thanks @ornias, if docker is absolutely off the table, those scripts won't be of interest. If self-hosting TrueCommand with little-to-no docker experience/interaction is desirable, perhaps @SamM should consider them.

TC wants to fit inside VM infrastructures, not sit adjacent to them. This is our approach to giving admins as much flexibility as possible.

 

[SamM]

TrueCommand comes as a docker container, which means it can run on TrueNAS SCALE itself.

Interesting proposition Mr. @Etorix. Perhaps run one instance on one SCALE server, and a backup instance on a second SCALE server in the same cluster? Or if it turns out that SCALE clusters will require a third 'disk witness' SCALE server, then maybe one TC instance there would be best? I don't know how this clustering thing is going to work out (hence the eagerness to play with it), but I trust there will eventually be a Best Practices writeup on the subject. The product is still in Beta so I just need to be patient.

What do you think prevents you from "the seemingly easiest solution of hosted TrueCommand"?

Unfortunately with all the big hacker breaches this year, Management will never go for giving SAN console & control to a third party, even if it's the manufacturer. Kaseya burned that bridge as recent as last week and it might be a while before businesses are willing to rebuild that bridge....

just a fancy GUI.

The "fancy GUI" is what puts the E in SCALE and does a LOT to differentiate SCALE from Gluster. Don't forget that FreeNAS owes a huge part of its success to what is one of it's greatest strengths, it's relative ease which mostly (if not entirely) comes from its quality WebGUI. The same team that you're praising put a lot of good work into the "fancy GUI" so that this amazing product would be available even to those "Layer 8" folks beneath you with "skill deficits"...

SCALE itself (for example: Using TrueCharts) also runs TrueCommand just fine. It's also not required to be enabled 24/7, so running it on a laptop "when needed" is also fine.

So store an extra laptop in the rack, just to run Linux, just to run Docker, just to run TC; not entirely without merit. I suppose I'd have to refer back to the TrueNAS servers independently for reporting & alerting since TC would be down most of the time. Not my favorite option presented thus far, but could work in a pinch; especially a Disaster Recovery situation.

I think the answer depends on the machine you want to run it on. .iso is good if you want a dedicated machine. TrueCommand is designed so that it doesn't need a dedicated machine.. it can run as a docker container with other things. For example, you could use a TrueNAS SCALE .iso and then add a TrueCommand instance via the Apps.

So what is your target machine?

@Etorix's suggestion wasn't bad, but this seems even better Mr. @morganL. I'm a visual person, so I avoid command-line like the plague (I don't deny the power of command line like PowerShell, they just rub me the wrong way); to each their own... Putting TC in the Apps page as an "Available Applications" sounds like a viable & user friendly option. If a user only has too click "Install" on the "Available Applications" page, that theoretically saves them from having to first learn Linux/Docker in the same way FreeNAS/TrueNAS has always shielded users from the underlying FreeBSD/Linux/Etc...

My target machine would have been a stand-alone VM appliance with a presumably small footprint; something connected to the TrueNAS cluster (albeit not connected to the rest of the world via cloud) but was not dependent on said cluster for it's own survival. In other words, I was hoping to put TC somewhere that it would still run even if the TrueNAS servers failed. Since that strategy (at least in the form that I'm thinking) isn't supported, then a built-in app on the Apps page would be the next best thing.

TC wants to fit inside VM infrastructures, not sit adjacent to them.

I see Mr. @aervin. So is TC expected to not be part of Disaster Recover? Maybe that's my big misconception (or at least part of it). Not the end of the world if that's the case. vCenter pretty much has the same issue. I can appreciate that one wouldn't NEED TC in a DR situation in the same way one doesn't NEED vCenter in a DR situation, I just assume it would help significantly in what would already be a stressful situation.

 

[morganL]

I see Mr. @aervin. So is TC expected to not be part of Disaster Recover? Maybe that's my big misconception (or at least part of it). Not the end of the world if that's the case. vCenter pretty much has the same issue. I can appreciate that one wouldn't NEED TC in a DR situation in the same way one doesn't NEED vCenter in a DR situation, I just assume it would help significantly in what would already be a stressful situation.

If you want true DR, I'd recommend TrueCommand Cloud or you need to host TC on a third site. DR is not trivial if you want it to be robust.

 

[Etorix]

Unfortunately with all the big hacker breaches this year, Management will never go for giving SAN console & control to a third party, even if it's the manufacturer. Kaseya burned that bridge as recent as last week and it might be a while before businesses are willing to rebuild that bridge....

Right, so "the seemingly easiest solution of hosted TrueCommand" was external hosting for you. To me, "the easiest solution" points to self-hosting and not relying on an external provider, or any kind of black box.
Apologies for the misunderstanding, but your position as an ESXi user who does not want to use Unix (other than hidden in an appliance, I guess) and is wary of using the command line is not an obvious situation.

External hosting being out, you can still host TrueCommand on the TrueNAS SCALE cluster it monitors—which should be the easiest deployment although not one you could rely on for disaster recovery. You can have a small server running its own TrueNAS SCALE instance for the sole purpose of running a TrueCommand chart.

So store an extra laptop in the rack, just to run Linux, just to run Docker, just to run TC; not entirely without merit. I suppose I'd have to refer back to the TrueNAS servers independently for reporting & alerting since TC would be down most of the time. Not my favorite option presented thus far, but could work in a pinch; especially a Disaster Recovery situation.

You don't even need to use Linux in any server or desktop flavour. There is a Docker desktop application for Windows or OS X (which, admittedly, is a BSD Unix in disguise…), so you can use your favourite GUI-based OS to host TrueCommand. At worst, it'll take copy-pasting a few lines of command, once, for the initial setup.

 

[ornias]

Interesting proposition Mr. @Etorix. Perhaps run one instance on one SCALE server, and a backup instance on a second SCALE server in the same cluster? Or if it turns out that SCALE clusters will require a third 'disk witness' SCALE server, then maybe one TC instance there would be best? I don't know how this clustering thing is going to work out (hence the eagerness to play with it), but I trust there will eventually be a Best Practices writeup on the subject. The product is still in Beta so I just need to be patient.

It's only storage clustering really, but yes in that case a third machine would be required...

Unfortunately with all the big hacker breaches this year, Management will never go for giving SAN console & control to a third party, even if it's the manufacturer. Kaseya burned that bridge as recent as last week and it might be a while before businesses are willing to rebuild that bridge....

at least those are competent managers imho.

The "fancy GUI" is what puts the E in SCALE and does a LOT to differentiate SCALE from Gluster.

I agree if one wanted to use the CLI SCALE might not be the best solution. However: I think it is worthwhile to note that even TrueCommand accepts CLI-Created Gluster volumes and is quite robust, as that info is not officially in the manual.

Don't forget that FreeNAS owes a huge part of its success to what is one of it's greatest strengths, it's relative ease which mostly (if not entirely) comes from its quality WebGUI.

That surely is the case and I tend to Agree I PERSONALLY would rather have seen the clustering being integrated in the stock GUI. But I also understand the arguments iX has against that (which I fiercely disagree with). Although both are not really relevant because your primary argument was the fact it required docker (which is even integrated in SCALE) or *NIX (Which includes scale).

Anyway, as I was explaining, with TrueCharts for example it is mostly a 6 click next-next-next process to add TrueCommand to SCALE and completely from the GUI. So as a mater of fact it is possible to setup clustering 100% from the GUI

The same team that you're praising put a lot of good work into the "fancy GUI" so that this amazing product would be available even to those "Layer 8" folks beneath you with "skill deficits"...

I never said you where beneath you and I refered to skill deficits in regards to what the install scripts are build for (it's mostly a "install docker and the truecommand container" install script). I actually said I donnot think you had skill deficits.

So store an extra laptop in the rack, just to run Linux, just to run Docker, just to run TC; not entirely without merit. I suppose I'd have to refer back to the TrueNAS servers independently for reporting & alerting since TC would be down most of the time.

Thats a good question, something iX should put more time into explaining: Which features are and which features are not still running when TrueCommand is shut-down.

Not my favorite option presented thus far, but could work in a pinch; especially a Disaster Recovery situation.

Afaik this was indeed one of the scenario's/arguments @morganL (correct me if i'm wrong) spoke of in favor of having a seperate application for true command

Putting TC in the Apps page as an "Available Applications" sounds like a viable & user friendly option. If a user only has too click "Install" on the "Available Applications" page, that theoretically saves them from having to first learn Linux/Docker in the same way FreeNAS/TrueNAS has always shielded users from the underlying FreeBSD/Linux/Etc...

It already is part of the TrueCharts catalog, so as a mater of fact: it IS available using the Apps GUI. :)

My target machine would have been a stand-alone VM appliance with a presumably small footprint; something connected to the TrueNAS cluster (albeit not connected to the rest of the world via cloud) but was not dependent on said cluster for it's own survival. In other words, I was hoping to put TC somewhere that it would still run even if the TrueNAS servers failed. Since that strategy (at least in the form that I'm thinking) isn't supported, then a built-in app on the Apps page would be the next best thing.

Well technically you can do that, it just utilises the dockerdaemon to run.

I see Mr. @aervin. So is TC expected to not be part of Disaster Recover? Maybe that's my big misconception (or at least part of it). Not the end of the world if that's the case. vCenter pretty much has the same issue. I can appreciate that one wouldn't NEED TC in a DR situation in the same way one doesn't NEED vCenter in a DR situation, I just assume it would help significantly in what would already be a stressful situation.

Interesting, what role do you see for TC within your disaster recovery workflow?

 

[SamM]

Right, so "the seemingly easiest solution of hosted TrueCommand" was external hosting for you.

Yes sir. The reason this was the easiest is because it seems to be very self-explanatory that users could theoretically just dive into it right out of the gate. I open the main WebGUI for either test SCALE appliance I have, right there in the top right corner is an option & wizard to create an account and link to the hosted version. After the question about the key hash (I didn't explore farther than that), I assume the wizard sets up the 'SonicWall GlobalVPN or OpenVPN like' connection, then presumably access TC interface via portal off the TrueNAS website.

All that to say: the path to hosted TC seems easy enough to get to since there's an easy to follow on-ramp right there in the console. No extra appliances, no emulators (Docker), no other 'middlemen' (Linux in this case) other than the fact that 'The Cloud' is a fancy way of saying someone else's server; which has pros and not just cons too.

It's a bummer, and pretty scary, what happened to Kaseya and Solar Winds; and the situation is probably going to get worse before it gets better IMHO.

you can still host TrueCommand on the TrueNAS SCALE cluster it monitors

I think this method is within my reach. I'll try it out when I get the chance (might be a while with the way things are going) and see how it goes. Even without DR, it should still be educational just being able to walk through TC and see what it's like; maybe even get to play with creating & serving mirrored iSCSI LUN's which is what my goal ultimately is.

There is a Docker desktop application for Windows or OS X (which, admittedly, is a BSD Unix in disguise…), so you can use your favourite GUI-based OS to host TrueCommand

Thanks for this link. This seems like a good play to start playing with emulator Docker gizmo.

 

[duongle90]

I setup the TrueNas scale with true Command and successfully added a cluster and the cluster volume SMB. However, with iSCSI manager, I tried to create a iSCSI with 3 pools and failed. It would be greatly appreciated if anyone can help? thank you!

 

[aervin]

Hey @duongle90 - we have an internal ticket to fix that iSCSI bug. It will be patched in the next TC release. Unfortunately, the iSCSI manager will not work on some SCALE versions in the meantime.

 

[duongle90]

Hey @duongle90 - we have an internal ticket to fix that iSCSI bug. It will be patched in the next TC release. Unfortunately, the iSCSI manager will not work on some SCALE versions in the meantime.

SO, some SCALE version not working, which version is working then? can you share the link? please

 

[aervin]

SO, some SCALE version not working, which version is working then? can you share the link? please

It is not working on either latest Angelfish or Bluefin it seems. Here's the ticket. Sorry, there are no workarounds at this time. The issue will also remain on older TC versions.

 

[morganL]

I setup the TrueNas scale with true Command and successfully added a cluster and the cluster volume SMB. However, with iSCSI manager, I tried to create a iSCSI with 3 pools and failed. It would be greatly appreciated if anyone can help? thank you!

View attachment 59535
View attachment 59536

FYI - Clustered systems are scale-out File and Object only. iSCSI/Block is per node only

TrueNAS SCALE iSCSI is less mature and tested than TrueNAS CORE... but its good to find and report these issues.