iturnedintoanewt

Not as good as the local sim (in Asia not by a long mile if I recall correctly), but it's way more convenient. Then again, here we can get some daily limited (500MB-1GB, depending the country) data roaming packages for the equivalent of 1-2€ daily. If it's quite a few days I'd go local sim, it's a bit of a hassle the first day, but their data packages are silly cheap. I guess in Europe/US/Canada I'd consider seriously some Airalo or equivalent.

Wow thanks! Let me take a look, I missed the portainer part! Sigh...I followed through the instructions. I deleted the previous stack, and created a new one, this time all the way from portainer. This time I ONLY modified the .env file, well and according to the instructions the .yaml referring to the .env as stack.env now. Made it deploy...and nothing. Still getting the same mkdir error :(

Yeah, the ones being VMs cannot be transferred easily to containers...I would have done so over to LXC, as it's been my preferred choice until now. But Home Assistant was deployed over a VM template provided by HA, and the windows VMs...well, they're Windows. I also have an ancient nginx/seafile install that I'm a bit afraid to move to LXC, but at some point I'll get to it. Having Immich for pictures would reduce a bit the size of some of the Seafile libraries :)

Thanks...I did follow their guide, step by step. The only thing that I customized was the immich uploads folder, which I want it to go to my NAS. I have it set up on an NFS mount handled by proxmox, and then it's just a transparent bind mount in the LXC. The user in the lxc container has read/write access to this location, and docker runs on this same user. But I reckon I'm addressing this in docker in a horribly messed way, as I've never used it before. Checking the docker logs immich_server, I'm getting this:

[Nest] 7  - 04/08/2024, 9:53:08 AM     LOG [SystemConfigService] LogLevel=log (set via system config)
node:fs:1380
  const result = binding.mkdir(
                         ^

Error: EACCES: permission denied, mkdir 'upload/library'
    at mkdirSync (node:fs:1380:26)
    at StorageRepository.mkdirSync (/usr/src/app/dist/repositories/storage.repository.js:112:37)
    at StorageService.init (/usr/src/app/dist/services/storage.service.js:30:32)
    at ApiService.init (/usr/src/app/dist/services/api.service.js:72:29)
    at process.processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:95:5)
    at async ApiModule.onModuleInit (/usr/src/app/dist/app.module.js:58:9)
    at async callModuleInitHook (/usr/src/app/node_modules/@nestjs/core/hooks/on-module-init.hook.js:51:9)
    at async NestApplication.callInitHook (/usr/src/app/node_modules/@nestjs/core/nest-application-context.js:223:13)
    at async NestApplication.init (/usr/src/app/node_modules/@nestjs/core/nest-application.js:100:9)
    at async NestApplication.listen (/usr/src/app/node_modules/@nestjs/core/nest-application.js:169:33) {
  errno: -13,
  code: 'EACCES',
  syscall: 'mkdir',
  path: 'upload/library'

Let's see... So let's say my LXC container has a /mnt/NAS-immich-folder path, already mounted and with rw permissions. Then I edited my docker-compose.yml volumes line as follows:

    volumes:
      - /mnt/NAS-immich-folder:/mnt/immich
      - ${UPLOAD_LOCATION}:/mnt/immich
      - /etc/localtime:/etc/localtime:ro

And my .env path looks like:

# The location where your uploaded files are stored
UPLOAD_LOCATION=/media/immich

...I'm sure I'm doing something horribly wrong besides the no-no of docker over LXC...Is there anything messed in these paths? What am I doing wrong? Thanks so much!

Thanks! When I type my LXC's IP:2283, I get unable to connect. I checked the docker-compose.yml and the port seems to be 2283:3001, but no luck at either. Is there anything that needs to be done on docker's network in order to..."publish" a container to the local network so it can be seen? Or any docker running with a port can be reached via the host's IP with no further config? Checking the portainer's networks section, I can see an 'immich-default' network using bridge on 172.18.0.0/16, while the system's bridge seems to be running at 172.17.0.0/16. Is this the correct defaults? Should I change anything?

Thanks!

Thanks! When I type my LXC's IP:2283, I get unable to connect. I checked the docker-compose.yml and the port seems to be 2283:3001, but no luck at either. Is there anything that needs to be done on docker's network in order to..."publish" a container to the local network so it can be seen? Or any docker running with a port can be reached via the host's IP with no further config? Checking the portainer's networks section, I can see an 'immich-default' network using bridge on 172.18.0.0/16, while the system's bridge seems to be running at 172.17.0.0/16. Is this the correct defaults? Should I change anything?

Thanks!

Thanks! When I type my LXC's IP:2283, I get unable to connect. I checked the docker-compose.yml and the port seems to be 2283:3001, but no luck at either. Is there anything that needs to be done on docker's network in order to..."publish" a container to the local network so it can be seen? Or any docker running with a port can be reached via the host's IP with no further config? Checking the portainer's networks section, I can see an 'immich-default' network using bridge on 172.18.0.0/16, while the system's bridge seems to be running at 172.17.0.0/16. Is this the correct defaults? Should I change anything?

Thanks!

Thanks...So you think a full VM will result in less overhead than a container? How so? I mean, the VM will take a bunch of extra RAM and extra overhead by running a full kernel by itself...

Sure...But proxmox is already there. It's installed and it runs 5VMs and about 10 containers. ...I'm not going to dump all that just because I need docker...and I'm not getting another machine if I can get use that. So...sure, there might be overhead, but I saw some other people doing it, and the other alternative I saw was running docker on a VM...which is even more overhead. And I fear running it on the proxmox server bare metal, it might conflict with how it manages the LXC containers.

Yes. I changed and didn't look back.

Thanks a lot, it really seems to be working! I'm seriously impressed with the results! Is it...always slow on load, even when there's no changes to the pictures folder?

Wow...This really does the job! It really went through my 2 years picture collection, which took about 40min (and a chunk of battery), but after that, any random search term was really nailed on the results shown! Seriously impressive. My concern is, when I opened it a second time, it still took a full couple of minutes to go through the whole picture set again, even though there were no changes to the library...Is there any problem, or the scan is always slow even when there's no changes?

Thanks a lot, this is awesome!