Fangtooth Unifies the TrueNAS Community Editions

:rofl: Thanks for sharing that prediction. Made my day. :laughing:

2 Likes

Yeah, ain’t going to happen… Particularly now that Microsoft allows anyone to download and run Windows without license and almost fully featured - and Apple has long stopped charging for OS upgrades, as they used to do for major version bumps. No reason for ordinary man to use anything else then.

Very careful language there. Why so? ”The expectation is” / ”being attentive to” / ”unlikely to be available”…? Not a corporate customer (professional rungekutta is not with iX ) so not in a position to expect anything, but I do find the vagueries puzzling. Presumably the position here is that Core will only receive security and critical bug fixes from the time of release of Fangtooth, for a time period yet to be clarified, subject to contract negotiations with paying customers of Core. After which iX will stop providing support altogether. Shouldn’t be controversial and presumably paying customer would expect that level of clarity?

It may be overly cautious, but we tend to be customer-focussed. When we have a customer with an issue that can’t be safely addressed with an upgrade, then we tend to fix the problem. After Fangtooth is released and quality is as expected, we’ll be more definitive.

I am excited for Fangtooth’s inclusion of Incus/LXC containers to replace my use of Jailmaker. Jailmaker has been fantastic and looking to replicate the same setup in Incus. I saw one of the recent TrueNAS Tech Talks with the Incus demo, thank you for showing that. I’m curious if there will be a way to build LXC containers without allocating specific core counts or memory size.

2 Likes

I found that odd too, as it looks like something you would do with a VM. I know Incus can also be used to deploy VMs, but for a container (“Linux jail”) it doesn’t really make sense.

Maybe it’s just something that was looked over in the GUI, in which the “allocated cores and RAM” options should be hidden if you choose to create a new container, rather than VM?

I’m honestly not sure how things look internally, but Proxmox does this for LXCs as well. But both for LXCs and for VMs, the core count and RAM are limits, not preallocated quantities.

1 Like

Why wouldn’t resource limits make sense in a container? :thinking:

I’d definitely want to be able to prevent any virtualized workload (containerized or full VM) from being able to run amok and hog the entirety of a host.

Edit: It’s important to understand that these are “resource limits” not “resource reservations”

2 Likes

Was referring to the term “allocate”.


I went back to watch the video, and I must have remembered it incorrectly: The GUI does indeed say “limit” and not “allocate”.

Lossless screenshot of the video in 1080p resolution
screenshot-of-t3

To be fair, and in our defense, the text is very small in the video, and @kris does say, “We’ll give it 2 CPUs and we’ll give it 4 gigs of memory.”

That does sound like “allocating”. :wink:

Limit vs allocate puts this all in perspective for me, thank you. In hindsight my choice of words was very poor in my original question, my apologies. I still am curious if there will be flexibility to NOT place a limit on container resources. For example, if I’m transcoding without the use of a GPU, I would want to throw almost everything and the kitchen sink at the job to get it done fast. I feel like I could be splitting hairs here but I’m remembering FreeNAS jails not having a limit… at least from how I remember them.

To clarify, those settings are indeed optional. They are limits you can put in place which make total sense and we absolutely want that capability. But you can ignore them and just tell your LXC container to use ALL the things as you see fit :slight_smile:

5 Likes

For another timeless interval, AC thought how best to do this. Carefully, AC organized the program.

The consciousness of AC encompassed all of what had once been a Universe and brooded over what was now Chaos. Step by step, it must be done.
And AC said, “LET THERE BE LINUX!”
And there was linux –

(With apologies to Asimov, The Last Question)

I’ve been using a non Windows desktop (often Linux) since 2007, but one guy isn’t a pattern. I have zero use for Windows. But yeah, it seems like it’s a moniker for a very very long time. I think you may be right in your prediction!

We mentioned it on the T3 show today, but I think this year (or next) may be the year of “Linux gaming on the desktop”. A subtle distinction, but important.

1 Like

I think you mentioned it in maybe the swap video. Either that one or the ECC video.

He means we literally talked about it in today’s episode:

I know, just saying it was also is one of those other videos too.

Would it be possible to cluster truenas incus with other incus nodes? This would be perfect for my two truenas boxes together with the 3-5 node Proxmox cluster

Is there any reason to continue to hold out on Core after Fangtooth is released? All I want from my NAS is a stable, reliable storage solution, I’m not interested in running any other services or virtualising it on proxmox etc. I like my storage to just be storage and on bare metal. I feel like an old man shouting at the wind, but now i’m also on a sinking ship lol

2 Likes

My position is similar to yours but I still welcome the move to Linux. Scale works just as well as, or better than Core as a NAS in my experience and you can opt to ignore all the app/virtualisation stuff and use dedicated hypervisors for that instead as relevant.